Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Phase2 Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Water Sector Commission approves Phase 2 funding recommendation and asks Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget to consider $2.1 million shortfall
Summary
The commission approved its staff funding recommendation for Phase 2 grant awards and instructed staff to seek JLCB action to cover an identified $2.1 million gap; LDH and DEQ explained scoring differences used for water and sewer project rankings.
The Water Sector Commission voted Thursday to approve staff’s recommended list of Phase 2 grant awards and directed staff to submit the package to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget (JLCB) to address an identified $2.1 million shortfall.
Why it matters: the approved recommendation distributes the available Phase 2 funds across water and sewer categories and population subgroups. Division staff told commissioners the recommended awards, if funded as recommended, would exceed the available balance by roughly $2.1 million and that the commission must decide whether to seek additional appropriations or adjust awards downward.
Tracy Watts summarized the allocation approach: staff applied categorical percentages (60% water, 40% sewer) and population-group splits to determine how to allocate the available balance across ranked applications. “Looking at the numbers … if we awarded down equal to numbers that are applications that had the same score, it would actually be … over your amount of your funding availability by 2,100,000,” Watts said. The commission voted to approve the recommended list and asked staff to place the package on JLCB’s agenda for consideration of the additional funds or a transfer.
Commissioners also questioned state agency staff about differences in scoring between LDH and DEQ. Blake Fogelman, deputy chief engineer for LDH, and Will Bartlett of DEQ joined the panel to explain methodology changes. Bartlett said consolidation scoring and certain weights were adjusted from the prior round to better reflect low-rate impact and customer-base weighting, which led to different numerical scores for some applicants compared with earlier rounds.
Ending: The commission thanked agency staff for the work behind the scoring and funding recommendation, approved the list, and directed staff to pursue the JLCB item; staff will return to the commission with further updates and any required administrative funding calculations.
