Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6a. American Rescue Plan Act and State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Item 6a Department: Finance Cost Center: 2001 For Agenda of: 3/1/2022 Placement: Study Session Estimated Time: 60 minutes FROM: Derek Johnson, City Manager Prepared By: Brigitte Elke, Finance Director SUBJECT: AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT AND STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS RECOMMENDATION 1. Direct Staff to return at the 2022-2023 Supplemental Budget to appropriate $3.5 million towards affordable housing that targets extremely low and very low income and/or homeless persons most impacted by COVID-19; $1 million to the infrastructure investment fund; and $100,000 to augment the Human Relations Commission annual Grants in Aid (GIA) cycle one time to further support health and human services programs or projects; or 2. Provide other strategic budget direction to staff on the use of the unappropriated portion of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds (in the amount of $4.6 million) for consideration with the 2022-2023 Supplemental Budget. REPORT-IN-BRIEF The purpose of this agenda item is to provide strategic budget direction to staff to return with the Supplemental Budget for the 2022-2023 fiscal year that aligns eligible expenses with the Final Rule as promulgated by the U.S. Treasury Department on January 22, 2022. Clarifying details of the Final Rule and other important relevant information are included in various footnotes on each page of this report. The Supplemental Budget is the second year of the City’s two-year financial plan and has historically constituted minor amendments to planned expenditures. This year is different as the amount of the American Rescue Plan Act funding increased from the projected $8.9 million to $13.5 million and $4.6 million is available for appropriation with the Supplemental Budget. Other minor adjustments other than ARPA funding will be recommended for the Supplemental Budget and yet, this historic one -time funding in amounts that exceed original forecasts are out of cycle with the financial planning process and provide the opportunity for the Council to afford direction in advance of the scheduled Supplemental Budget hearing on June 7, 2022. Page 155 of 381 Item 6a Early clarity and specificity will help align funding in the Supplemental Budget with other Major City Goal work plan efforts and position the city to support any unique opportunities that could benefit from one time funding. Because of the size and restrictions of the funding, early direction and planning will help position the City to efficiently direct funding to eligible needs and uses and make any adjustments needed to work plans On February 15, 2022, the City Council received a recommendation during mid-year budget report from the City Manager based on Council comments about the possible use of unappropriated ARPA funding in the amount of $4.6 million. The City Council provided direction to return with recommendations to prioritize $3.5 million of ARPA funding towards housing and homelessness and $100,0001 for additional assistance to local non- profits, leaving $1 million which is recommended to go toward the Infrastructure Investment Fund. The staff recommendation for funding appropriation amounts are based on an analysis of the Final Rule and alignment with the City’s Four Major City Goals. Other options are available in the three eligible categories if the City Council wants to split the amount between uses. More details about these categories are discussed below. DISCUSSION In March 2021, Congress approved the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) which provided funding to state, county, and local jurisdictions through the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program (SLFRF). The program was designed to provide vital resources to state, county, and local governments to respond to the pandemic and its economic effects and to replace revenue loss due to the public health emergency, preventing reductions to government services. To provide further guidance as to the use of the funding, the U.S. Department of the Treasury issued an interim final rule in May 2021 which was followed by the Final Rule on January 22, 2022. Though the Final Rule did not establish an y additional funding options, it streamlined the use of funding and reduced the administrative burden for jurisdictions and set forth four different eligible use categories. Staff’s recommendation for specific appropriation amounts aligns Final Rule permissible uses and with Major City Goal priorities. If Council pursues different appropriations, Staff recommends that the City Council still evaluate and align funding with Major City Goal priorities. 1 The $100,000 was predicated on a recommendation by Human Relations Commission staff that justifiable funding requests exceed the budgeted Grants in Aid (GIA) general fund budget of $150,000 for the 2022- 2023 fiscal year. Page 156 of 381 Item 6a Specifically, the ARPA provides that SLFRF funds may be used to: a) To respond to the public health emergency or its negative economic impacts, including assistance to households, housing, homelessness, small businesses, and nonprofits, or aid to impacted industries such as tourism, travel, and hospitality (1. Economic Recovery and Public Health). b) To respond to workers performing essential work during the COVID -19 public health emergency by providing premium pay to eligible workers (2. Premium Pay) c) For the provision of government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue due to the COVID-19 public health emergency relative to revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year prior to the emergency (3. Revenue Loss); and d) To make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure (4. Utilities Infrastructure). More details about the four categories are provided below and this report will outline options under the Final Rule as well as the City’s funding appropriations included in the 2021-23 Financial Plan (Table A) which already considers $8.9 million under revenue loss, leaving $1.1 million under this most flexible spending category (REVENUE LOSS) and $3.5 million that needs to be directly tied to the Final Rule’s other three funding categories for a total of $4.6 million. Page 157 of 381 Item 6a Table A # CATEGORIES 2021-2023 FINANCIAL PLAN 2022-23 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET (RECOMMENDED) MAJOR CITY GOAL PRIORITY 1 Economic And Public Health Impacts $3,564,4672 Housing And Homelessness3 2 Premium Pay for Eligible Workers 3 Revenue Loss $8.9 million $10 million4 Economic Recovery, Resiliency and Fiscal Sustainability5 4 Utilities Infrastructure 5 Available For Appropriation $0 $0 6 TOTAL: $8.9 million $13,564,467 2 $3.4 available for appropriation under three categories (Economic and Public Health, Premium Pay for Eligible Workers and Utilities Infrastructure. Staff is recommending $3.3 million for housing and/or homelessness and $100,000 for the HRC based on previous Council discussions and the fact that this eligible use aligns with the City’s Major City Goal and otherwise provides services or support traditionally offered by the City of San Luis Obispo. 3In order to expand housing opt ions for all, continue to facilitate the production of housing, including the necessary supporting infrastructure, with an emphasis on affordable and workforce housing. Collaborate with local non-profit partners, and the county, the state and federal government to discover and implement comprehensive and effective strategies to reduce chronic homelessness. 4$1.1 (Revenue Loss) is recommended to be allocated in the infrastructure investment fund for critical infrastructure (MCG) and the Final Rule allowances for “Road building & maintenance and other infrastructure”. Specific projects would be recommended in the 2022-2023 Supplemental Budget. 5In collaboration with local partners, continue to support economic recovery for all from the COVID pandemic and support a thriving local economy by supporting local businesses, arts and culture, downtown vitality, practicing fiscal responsibility, paying down unfunded pension liabilities, and investing in critical infrastructure. Page 158 of 381 Item 6a 1. Economic and Public Health Impacts The SLFRF program provides resources for governments to meet the public health and economic needs of those impacted by the pandemic in their communities, as well as address longstanding health and economic disparities resulting in more severe impacts from the pandemic. The eligible use category to respond to public health and negative economic impacts is organized around the types of assistance and includes several sub-categories:  Public Health  Assistance to households 6  Assistance to small businesses  Assistance to nonprofit organizations 7  Aid to impacted industries (tourism, hospitality)  Public sector capacity In general, to identify eligible uses of funds in this category, recipients should (1) identify a COVID-19 public health or economic impact on an individual or class (i.e., a group) and (2) design a program that responds to that impact. Responses should be related and reasonably proportional to the harm identified and reasonably designed to benefit those impacted. Table B Step Identify COVID-19 public health or economic impact Design a response that addresses or responds to the impact Analysis  Can identify impact to a specific household, business, or nonprofit or to a class of households, businesses, or nonprofits.  Can also identify disproportionate impacts, or more severe impacts, to a specific beneficiary or to a class  Types of responses can include a program, service, or capital expenditure  Response should be related & reasonably proportional to the harm  Response should also be reasonably designed to benefit impacted individual or class. Simplifying Presumptions  Final Rule presumes certain populations & classes are impacted & disproportionately impact.  Final Rule provides non- exhaustive list of enumerated eligible uses that respond to pandemic 6 Includes housing and homelessness 7 The County of SLO Community Foundation has offered to administer any grants should the Council be inclined to delegate grant making authority. Page 159 of 381 Item 6a and disproportionate impacts. Enumerated eligible uses for a municipality such as San Luis Obispo: Table C Responding to the public health emergency  Public Communication Efforts  PPE/protective supplies  Support for prevention, mitigation, or other services in childcare facilities  Support for prevention and mitigation strategies in small businesses, nonprofits, and impacted industries  Emergency operations centers & emergency response equipment (e.g., emergency response radio systems.  Paid family & medical leave for public employees to enable compliance with COVID-19 public health precautions Behavioral Health Care  Crisis care, diversion programs, outreach to individuals not yet engaged in treatment, harm reduction & long-term recovery support  Behavioral health facilities & equipment.  Referrals to trauma recovery services for victims of crime  Law enforcement officers focused on advancing community policing Negative Economic Impacts  Assistance to low- or moderate- income households *  Households that experienced unemployment  Households that experienced increased food or housing insecurity  When providing affordable housing programs: households that qualify for the National Housing Trust Fund and Home Investment Partnerships Program.8 8 Should council support the Staff recommendation or provide direction for this category, it is recommended that the City allocate funding to affordable housing projects that meet the criteria established by the City Council in Resolution #9263 (2001 Series) (Attachment A) in addition to all applicable rules and requirements under the SLFRF Final Rule. The criteria under the Resolution include Eligibility, Need, Suitability, Timing, Financial Effectiveness and Readiness. These criteria are already by the City Council and provide Staff with the guidance needed to recommend approval of requests for funding of qualified affordable housing projects. City Council approval of each award would continue to be required to make the appropriate findings under ARPA’s SLFRF Final Rule requirements. The City’s Affordable Housing Fund currently has an uncommitted balance of $200,724 which is not sufficient to meet short-term needs and City Staff has had several conversations with Affordable Housing Providers about the immediate and near- term need for additional funding to complete projects. and thus smaller funding request may be brought forward to the City Council prior to the formal NOFA process. Page 160 of 381 Item 6a  Programs or services to support long- term housing security, including development of affordable housing & permanent supportive housing.9  Improvements to vacant and abandoned properties, including rehabilitation or maintenance, renovation, removal and remediation of environmental contaminants, demolition or deconstruction, greening/vacant lot cleanup & conversion to affordable housing. Assistance to Nonprofits (501(c)(3) or 501(c)(19) tax-exempt organizations)  Loans or grants to mitigate financial hardship  Technical or in-kind assistance and services that mitigate negative economic impacts directly tied to the pandemic Restore and Bolster Public Sector Capacity  Police officers  Firefighters  Emergency medical responders  Dispatchers and supervisor personnel directly supporting public safety staff.  Employees involved in providing medical and other physical or mental health services to patients  Child, elder, or family care employees  Restoring pre-pandemic employment for the same positions that existed on January 27, 2020, but were unfilled or eliminated as of March 3, 2021. Supporting & Retaining Public Sector Workers  Provide additional funding for employees who experienced pay reductions or were furloughed  Provide worker retention incentives, incl. reasonable increases in compensation.  Covering administrative cost associated with administering the hiring, support, & retention programs.  Effective Service Delivery  Community outreach & engagement activities  Capacity building resources to support using data and evidence, incl. hiring staff, consultants, or technical assistance support  Technology infrastructure to improve access to and the user experience of government IT systems, as well as technology improvements to increase 9 This allowable subcategory aligns with the City’s Housing and Homelessness Major City Goals. Page 161 of 381 Item 6a public access and delivery of government programs and services *Note: low- or moderate-income households are those with 1) income at or below 300% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines 2) income at or below 65% of the area median income for the county. Page 162 of 381 Item 6a 2. PREMIUM PAY FOR ELIGIBLE WORKERS The second permissible category is premium pay for eligible workers. General details are provided below. Table D Premium Pay for Eligible workers (Eligible workers include workers “needed to maintain continuity of operations of essential critical infrastructure sectors.)  Emergency Response  Sanitation, disinfection & cleaning  Maintenance  Grocery stores, restaurants,  Behavioral Health  Family & Childcare  Local workforce  Solid waste & hazardous materials clean-up  Hotel & commercial lodging facilities that are used for COVID- 19 mitigation & containment Note: Essential Work cannot be performed while teleworking from a residence and involves a) regular, in-person interactions with the public or coworkers, b) regular physical handling of items that were handled by the public or coworkers. 3. Replacing Lost Public Sector Revenue The City of San Luis Obispo can use SLFRF funds on government services up to the revenue loss amount, whether that be the standard allowance amount of $10 million, or the amount calculated using the above approach. Government services generally include any service traditionally provided by a government unless Treasury has stated otherwise. Here are some common examples, although this list is not exhaustive:  Road building & maintenance and other infrastructure.  Environmental remediation.  General government administration, staff, and administrative facilities.  Provision of police, fire, and other public safety services (incl. purchase of fire trucks & policy vehicle. Public Sector Revenue Loss is the most flexible eligible use category under the SLFRF program, and funds are subject to streamlined reporting an d compliance requirements. The City needs to be mindful that certain restrictions, which are detailed further in the Restrictions on Use section and apply to all uses of funds, apply to government services as well. Page 163 of 381 Item 6a With the 2021-23 Financial Plan, the City has already appropriated $8.9 million to its Infrastructure Investment Fund to replenish capital funding lost to operating cost in response to the community’s needs and to assist with economic recovery. The funding was appropriated for the Prado Bridge replacement which has already obtained all CEQA related permits and is a fully federalized project and a critical piece of the Prado Road corridor. Given the scope of the City’s pending CIP program, Staff recommends that an additional $1 million be added to the infrastructure investment fund given the price volatility in the construction sector over the next 16 months. Framework for Eligible Uses Beyond Those Enumerated The City of San Luis Obispo has broad flexibility to identify and respond to other pandemic impacts and serve other populations that experienced pandemic impacts, beyond the enumerated uses and presumed eligible populations. However, the City should undergo the following steps to decide whether the project is eligible: Table E Step Identify COVID-19 public health or economic impact Design a response that addresses or responds to the impact Analysis  Can identify impact to a specific household, business, or nonprofit or to a class of households, businesses, or nonprofits.  Can also identify disproportionate impacts, or more severe impacts, to a specific beneficiary or to a class  Types of responses can include a program, service, or capital expenditure  Response should be related & reasonably proportional to the harm  Response should also be reasonably designed to benefit impacted individual or class. 1. Identify a COVID-19 public health or negative economic impact on an individual or a class. Recipients should identify an individual or class that is “impacted” or “disproportionately impacted” by the COVID-19 public health emergency or its negative economic impacts as well as the specific impact itself.  “Impacted” entities are those impacted by the disease itself or the harmful consequences of the economic disruptions resulting from or exacerbated by the COVID-19 public health emergency. For example, an individual who lost their job or a small business that saw lower revenue during a period of closure would both have experienced impacts of the pandemic.  “Disproportionately impacted” entities are those that experienced disproportionate public health or economic outcomes from the pandemic; Treasury recognizes that pre-existing disparities, in many cases, amplified the impacts of the pandemic, causing more severe impacts in underserved communities. For example, a household living in a neighborhood with limit ed access to medical care and healthy foods may have faced health disparities before the pandemic, like a higher rate of chronic health conditions, that contributed to more severe health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Page 164 of 381 Item 6a 2. The city may designate classes that experienced disproportionate impact, by assessing the impacts of the pandemic and finding that some populations experienced meaningfully more severe impacts than the general public. To determine these disproportionate impacts, the city:  May designate classes based on academic or government research publications (such as the citations provided in the supplementary information in the final rule), through analysis of their own data, or through analysis of other existing data sources.  May also consider qualitative research and sources to augment their analysis, or when quantitative data is not readily available. Such sources might include resident interviews or feedback from relevant state and local agencies, such as public health departments or social services departments.  Should consider the quality of the research, data, and applicability of analysis to their determination in all cases. This report does not address assistance to Small Businesses since the City has invested substantial funding during 2020 and 2021 to assist small businesses including:  50 parklets for restaurants & barber shops  Tenant improvement program  Small Business assistance grants  Shop Local Campaign  Downtown Activation Water, Sewer & Broadband Infrastructure The final rule significantly broadens eligible broadband infrastructure investments to address challenges with broadband access, affordability, and reliability, and adds additional eligible water and sewer infrastructure investments, including a broader range of lead remediation and stormwater management projects. The following are broad details of eligible projects under this category. Table F Infrastructure – Eligible projects  Culvert repair, resizing, and removal.  Stormwater infrastructure  Cybersecurity Investments Restrictions on Use While recipients such as the City of San Luis Obispo have considerable flexibility to use the SLFRF program to address the diverse needs of its community, some restrictions on use of funds apply. Page 165 of 381 Item 6a  Offset a reduction in net tax revenue resulting from a change in law, regulations or administrative interpretation.  Deposits into Pension Funds to reduce accrued, unfunded liability.  No debt service or replenishing of financial reserves  No satisfaction of settlements and judgments  Any use or projects that conflict with or contravenes the purpose of ARPA. Next steps With direction from the City Council, staff will return in June 2022 at the Budget Supplement and provide specific recommendations for the use of $4.6 million in compliance with the U.S. Treasury’s Final Rule that best serves the need of the community and the Council’s Major City Goals. A budgetary resolution would be brought forth to the City Council to document the full $13.5 million in appropriations for future clarity on reporting and for transparency. Previous Council or Advisory Body Action The Council acted on $8.9 million of SLFRF with the adoption of the 2021 -23 Financial Plan. Policy Context The use of SLFRF have to follow the U.S. Treasury’s Final Rule and should be aligned with community needs as well as the City’s adopted Major City Goals. Public Engagement Public Comment on the item can be provided to the City Council through written correspondence prior to the meetin g and through public testimony at the meeting. Final appropriation as part of the supplemental budget will be done at a public hearing on June 1, 2022, or thereafter if continued. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The California Environmental Quality Act does not ap ply to the recommended action in this report because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378. FISCAL IMPACT Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2022-23 Funding Identified: Yes Page 166 of 381 Item 6a Fiscal Analysis: Funding Sources Total Budget Available Current Funding Request Remaining Balance Annual Ongoing Cost General Fund $ $ $ $ State Federal $13,564,467 Fees Total $ $ $ $ The city, like many other state, county, and local jurisdictions, has experienced a tremendous revenue loss in several major tax and fee categories during 2020 into 2021. It has also used its resources to support the community and assist with its economic recovery. The funding received through SLFRF under ARPA will backfill $10 million in revenue loss and provide an additional $3.5 million for investments in accordance with the U.S. Treasury’s Final Rule as outlined in this report and $1.1 million that can generall y be appropriated. Since the second installment of the funding will be received in July 2022, the Financial Plan Supplement will establish the use and appropriation of the funding through Council deliberation and direction and public input. ALTERNATIVES Council could pursue the other following alternatives: 1. Continue the item and provide no action and defer further direction to the June 7, 2022, Supplemental Budget Hearing. This is not recommended as funds must be appropriated by 2024 and spent by 2026 and any appropriations are likely going to take a few years to be fully spent and there is a strong likelihood that desirable projects consistent with the Housing and Homeless MCG and Final Rule will need a pledge of funding prior to June 2022. 2. Form an ad-hoc committee of City Council members to provide a recommendation to the City Council on June 7, 2022. 3. Request additional information and schedule an additional study session prior to June 7, 2022, Supplemental Budget Hearing. ATTACHMENT A – Resolution No. 9263 (2001 Series) Page 167 of 381 Page 168 of 381 RESOLUTION NO. 9263 (2001 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ESTABLISHING AWARD CRITERIA AND A REVIEW PROCESS FOR ALLOCATING AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDS. WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1348 (1999 Series) establishing an Affordable Housing Fund for the collection and distribution of in -lieu housing fees to promote affordable housing in San Luis Obispo; and WHEREAS, as a result of the in -lieu fee payments to the City under the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the City has a balance of approximately $400,000 in the Affordable Housing Fund, and this fund is available to support affordable housing in San Luis Obispo at the sole discretion of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City received requests by Judson Terrace Lodge and Sojourn Services, Inc. for the use of $215,000 and $25,000, respectively, of Affordable Housing Funds; and to evaluate these and future funding requests in a fair and timely manner, Council wishes to establish award criteria and a review process for the Affordable Housing Fund; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a meeting on December 4, 2001 to consider possible award criteria that balance the need to provide a fair, open and timely funding award process with the desire to maintain funding flexibility to address local housing needs and opportunities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that based on its deliberations, public comments, the staff report, and on State law, the following: SECTION 1. Affordable Housing Fund Award Criteria. The City Council establishes the following criteria for evaluating requests for use of the Affordable Housing Fund: 1. Eligibility. Use of the Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) for the requested purpose will increase or improve the City's affordable housing inventory and promote General Plan policies regarding housing. 2. Need. There exists a substantial or overarching need for the type of housing to be assisted. 3. Suitability. The project to be assisted is appropriate for its location, both in terms of land use and design. 4. Timing. The project would be better serve the City's needs if it were built immediately as opposed to later. R 9263 Page 169 of 381 I OI_ l Resolution No. 9263 (2001 Series) Page 2 5. Financial Effectiveness. But for the requested assistance, the project would not be economically feasible; or AHF funding "leverages" significant additional funding from other sources. 6. Readiness. The project has all necessary City approvals and is ready to proceed. SECTION 2. Use of Award Criteria. The Council will apply the above criteria when evaluating funding requests. Requests that most closely meet the criteria will be given the most favorable consideration in allocating Affordable Housing Funds. Under no circumstances is Council obligated to award Affordable Housing Funds. The decision whether to allocate funds and how much is at the sole discretion of the City Council whose decision is final. SECTION 3. Review Process. The Community Development Director shall be responsible for processing requests for use of Affordable Housing Funds. Such requests shall usually be considered concurrent with review of the City's Community Development Block Grant Program. The Director is authorized to bring urgent funding requests to the Council at any time, irrespective of the above review cycle. SECTION 4. Funding Agreements. Recipients of Affordable Housing Funds shall be required to execute an agreement with the City describing the purpose and terms of funding. The project or program to be funded shall meet the City's Affordable Housing Standards, including the requirement for an affordability term of at least thirty (30) years, and City equity participation in the project where feasible and appropriate. The City Administrative Officer is authorized to execute such agreements for the City. Upon motion of Council Member Schwartz; seconded by Vice Mayor Marx, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Ewan, Mulholland,,Schwartz, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Settle NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 4h day of December 2001 ATTE T: r Lee Price, City Clerk. Page 170 of 381 1. Resolution No. 9263 (2001 Series) Page 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Page 171 of 381 Page 172 of 381 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum City of San Luis Obispo Council Agenda Correspondence DATE: March 1, 2022 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Michael Codron, Director of Community Development VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager SUBJECT: Item #6.a – American Rescue Plan Act and State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds During the course of preparing the Council Agenda Report for this item, an incorrect and out of date Affordable Housing Fund balance was published in the report. The correct Affordable Housing Fund balance is: $1,645,413.03 The fund balance previously reported did not account for recent changes to the fund and assumed that an award of $1.3 Million in support of People’s Self -Help Housing Corporation’s Broad Street Place project was not paid, when in fact it was paid. The error was administrative on the part of staff in Community Development. The Finance Department maintains the true and accurate account balance for this fund. The additional balance that is available in the Affordable Housing Fund provides the City Council with more flexibility regarding the projects that it wants to fund and support going forward. The City’s Affordable Housing Fund is suited to smaller awards for more projects, whereas the ARPA funding, which has additional criteria and reporting requirements, would be better to award in one or two grants. Page 173 of 381 Page 174 of 381 American Rescue Plan Act & State and Local Fiscal Recovery FundsMarch 1, 2022 1.Direct Staff to return at the 2022-2023 Supplemental Budget to appropriate $3.5 million towards affordable housing that targets extremely low and very low income and/or homeless persons most impacted by COVID-19; $1 million to the infrastructure investment fund; and $100,000 to augment the Human Relations Commission annual Grants in Aid (GIA) cycle one time to further support health and human services programs or projects; or 2.Provide other strategic budget direction to staff on the use of the unappropriated portion of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds (in the amount of $4.6 million) for consideration with the 2022-2023 Supplemental BudgeRecommendations American Rescue Plan Act ARPAAmerican Rescue Plan ActCongressional ActAlso knows as the Covid-19 stimulus package - $1.9 trillion in economic stimulus funding.3/11/21 retroactive availability12/31/24 all funds committed12/31/26 all funds spent Housing $ 42 billionOther $173 billionAgriculture $16 billionVeteran Affairs $27 billionRestaurants $25 billionTransportation & Infrastructure $71 billionExpanded Tax Credits $143 billionSmall Business -$84 billionSmall Biz Support $59 billionStimulus Checks - $410 billionHealth - $105 billionState & Local Fiscal Recovery Funds -$350 billionEducation $173 billionCovid-19 Related Policy $123 billionExtended Unemployment Benefits $246 billion Economic Recovery & Public HealthTo respond to the public health emergency or its negative economic impacts, incl. assistance to households, housing, homelessness, small businesses, & nonprofits, or aid to impacted industries e.g. tourism, travel, & hospitality Premium PayTo respond; to workers performing essential work during the COVID-19 public health emergency by providing premium pay to eligible workers.Revenue LossFor the provision of government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue relative to revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year prior to the emergency. InfrastructureTo make necessary investments in water, sewer, and/or broadband infrastructure.Funding Options for Local Jurisdictions Revenue LossFor the provision of government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue relative to revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year prior to the emergency. Revenue LossFinal Rule - $10 million or calculation of lossMost flexible allocation – General Government Services2021-23 Financial Plan allocated $8.9 million into Infrastructure Investment FundRemaining $1.1 millionRecommendation:• $100,000 to Grants-in-Aid through HRC• $1 million to infrastructure 2021-23 Major City GoalHousing & Homelessness. To expand housing options for all, continue to facilitate the production of housing, incl. the necessary supporting infrastructure, with an emphasis on affordable & workforce housing. Collaborate with local non-profit partners and the county, the state, & federal government to discover & implement comprehensive & effective strategies to reduce chronic homelessness. Economic Recovery & Public HealthEconomic Recovery & Public HealthTo respond to the public health emergency or its negative economic impacts, incl. assistance to households, housing, homelessness, small businesses, & nonprofits, or aid to impacted industries e.g. tourism, travel, & hospitality Funding tied to Final Rule $3,564,467Recommendation: Direct Staff to return at the 2022-2023 Supplemental Budget to appropriate $3.5 million towards affordable housing that targets extremely low and very low income and/or homeless persons most impacted by COVID-19Responding to Public Health EmergencyBehavioral HealthNegative Economic ImpactsAssistance to Nonprofits (501(c)(3) or (19)Restore & Bolster Public Sector CapacityAssistance to households- Food insecurity- Unemployment- Affordable housing programSupporting & Retaining Public Sector WorkersEffective Service Delivery Affordable Housing ProjectsOn the Horizon…HASLOAnderson Hotel Purchase and RehabilitationMaxine Lewis Site RedevelopmentUpper Monterey Senior and Family HousingTMHA Palm Street Studios – No Place Like Home GrantHousing for Homeless or At RiskARPA Grant Request - $300,000 County of SLO ARPA ActionToday the Board of Supervisors allocated ARPA funding to the following projects:Project NameOrganization Award AmountDescription LocationAnderson Hotel PreservationHousing Authority of San Luis Obispo$2,000,000 Preserves 68 units of very low-income housingSan Luis ObispoArroyo Grande Affordable HousingHousing Authority of San Luis Obispo$1,946,000 Adds 63 new units to serve up to 124 low to very-low-income individualsArroyo GrandeNon-Congregate Shelter5Cities Homeless Coalition$400,000 New temporary non-congregate emergency shelter providing 80 very low-income individuals with non-congregate shelterGrover BeachJD0 Slide 10JD0 [@Poschman, Hans], please add information from tomorrow's BOS action. [@Elke, Brigitte]Johnson, Derek, 2022-02-28T16:44:52.263PH0 0 [@Johnson, Derek] [@Elke, Brigitte] Updated to reflect the the BOS vote. Of note Supervisor Peschong and Gibson indicated some disappointment that the City had not allocated funding to the Anderson project. Wade did let them know that he has been talking with the City about some projects. Poschman, Hans, 2022-03-01T19:16:50.354EB0 1 [@Poschman, Hans] Thank you, Hans. [@Johnson, Derek] - do you want me to mention the BOS comments regarding the Anderson?Elke, Brigitte, 2022-03-01T19:23:55.352 1.Direct Staff to return at the 2022-2023 Supplemental Budget to appropriate $3.5 million towards affordable housing that targets extremely low and very low income and/or homeless persons most impacted by COVID-19; $1 million to the infrastructure investment fund; and $100,000 to augment the Human Relations Commission annual Grants in Aid (GIA) cycle one time to further support health and human services programs or projects; or 2.Provide other strategic budget direction to staff on the use of the unappropriated portion of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds (in the amount of $4.6 million) for consideration with the 2022-2023 Supplemental BudgeRecommendations