HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.a. CARES Act Funds Usage
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council Work Session: August 4, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: Utilization of CARES Act Funds AGENDA SECTION:
Discussion
PREPARED BY: Logan Martin, City Administrator AGENDA NO. 2.a.
ATTACHMENTS: CARES Act Guidance for Local Gov’t APPROVED BY: LJM
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss utilization of CARES Act Funds and provide direction
BACKGROUND
As previously discussed, the Federal legislation known as the CARES Act created the Coronavirus Relief
Fund, which allocated $150 billion to state and local governments to support the nationwide response to the
pandemic. Based on the per capita distribution developed by MMB, Rosemount has now received
$1,833,933 in CARES Act funds.
While this has been a quickly developing situation, staff has been working with our partners to ensure all
decisions made surrounding the utilization of these funds is permissible within the confines of the CARES
Act.
In short, the CARES Act provides funds to cover costs that:
1. are necessary expenditures incurred due to the public health emergency with respect to the
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19);
2. were not accounted for in the budget most recently approved as of March 27, 2020, and
3. were incurred during the period that begins on March 1, 2020 and ends on December 30, 2020
The guidance goes on to establish six broad categories of eligible expenditures, such as medical & public
health expenses, payroll for public safety and public health, economic support to businesses effected by
mandated closures, and more. Analysis by partners at the League of MN Cities, consulting auditing firms,
along with the Federal government continues to assert that public safety salaries can be funded with CARES
Act dollars.
As such, staff would like to engage the Council in a discussion surrounding the following broad parameters
of Rosemount’s plan for usage of these funds.
Proposed Funding Categories Estimated Allocation of Funds
Necessary expenditures to protect staff and
residents (PPE, Facility updates, teleworking)
$110,000
Rosemount CARES Business Grant Program Up to $500,000
Costs for a portion of Public Safety Salaries
impacted by COVID-19
$1,200,000
2
Necessary Expenditures for City Operations
This category of funds would include personal protective equipment already acquired, including masks,
plexiglass, cleaning solutions, and increased janitorial services. Also included is technological equipment
needed to facilitate teleworking for staff during the pandemic, including laptops, internet boosters, and
computer equipment. To date, the City has expended approximately $45,000 toward the aforementioned
efforts.
Also included in this category are safety improvements to City facilities moving forward in response to the
pandemic. This includes touchless plumbing fixtures, temporary facilities to support physical distancing,
and improvements to the ventilation systems of facilities to ensure safe air circulation.
Rosemount CARES Business Grant Program
Supporting local businesses will continue to be a crucial component of the pandemic response, and the
CARES Act specifically allows for municipalities to allocate their Federal funds toward business grant
programs. Economic Development staff have worked with partners throughout Dakota County to establish
the Rosemount CARES Grant Program, which will provide $10,000 grants to businesses in Rosemount that
fall within certain guidelines. One-time contributions to community partners involved in responding to the
pandemic will also be discussed with the Council.
A detailed discussion of this program is addressed in a separate memo, and formal action on this program
is requested during the August 4 regular meeting.
Public Safety Salaries
The remainder of funds available to the City are proposed to be utilized to fund a portion of our Public
Safety Salaries that have been impacted by the COVD-19 pandemic. Expenditures in funds 1 & 2 will evolve
through the coming months, so staff proposes to utilize the remainder of the funds for Public Safety salaries.
The 2020 Budget includes approximately $3.67 million in Public Safety salaries, so the City will have
sufficient expenditures to account for in this category.
The City will be required to engage in a standalone audit of these funds, so it is imperative that we track
these funds accurately and receive Council authorization for each category of funds as we approach the
end of the year (when the funds need to be expended). We have already received the full amount of these
funds, so we are essentially “withdrawing” from our own accounts to utilize these funds.
Formal action on the Rosemount CARES Grant program is requested on August 4, and a general
discussion of the other categories will also be completed. Council will take formal action on the other
usage categories of CARES Act Funds as those expenditures are completed.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests feedback from the City Council on the proposed plan for utilization of the CARES Act
funds.
1
Coronavirus Relief Fund
Guidance for State, Territorial, Local, and Tribal Governments
Updated June 30, 2020 1
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to recipients of the funding available under section
601(a) of the Social Security Act, as added by section 5001 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic
Security Act (“CARES Act”). The CARES Act established the Coronavirus Relief Fund (the “Fund”)
and appropriated $150 billion to the Fund. Under the CARES Act, the Fund is to be used to make
payments for specified uses to States and certain local governments; the District of Columbia and U.S.
Territories (consisting of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam,
American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands); and Tribal governments.
The CARES Act provides that payments from the Fund may only be used to cover costs that—
1. are necessary expenditures incurred due to the public health emergency with respect to
the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID–19);
2. were not accounted for in the budget most recently approved as of March 27, 2020 (the
date of enactment of the CARES Act) for the State or government; and
3. were incurred during the period that begins on March 1, 2020, and ends on December 30,
2020.2
The guidance that follows sets forth the Department of the Treasury’s interpretation of these limitations
on the permissible use of Fund payments.
Necessary expenditures incurred due to the public health emergency
The requirement that expenditures be incurred “due to” the public health emergency means that
expenditures must be used for actions taken to respond to the public health emergency. These may
include expenditures incurred to allow the State, territorial, local, or Tribal government to respond
directly to the emergency, such as by addressing medical or public health needs, as well as expenditures
incurred to respond to second-order effects of the emergency, such as by providing economic support to
those suffering from employment or business interruptions due to COVID-19-related business closures.
Funds may not be used to fill shortfalls in government revenue to cover expenditures that would not
otherwise qualify under the statute. Although a broad range of uses is allowed, revenue replacement is
not a permissible use of Fund payments.
The statute also specifies that expenditures using Fund payments must be “necessary.” The Department
of the Treasury understands this term broadly to mean that the expenditure is reasonably necessary for its
intended use in the reasonable judgment of the government officials responsible for spending Fund
payments.
Costs not accounted for in the budget most recently approved as of March 27, 2020
The CARES Act also requires that payments be used only to cover costs that were not accounted for in
the budget most recently approved as of March 27, 2020. A cost meets this requirement if either (a) the
1 This version updates the guidance provided under “Costs incurred during the period that begins on March 1, 2020,
and ends on December 30, 2020”.
2 See Section 601(d) of the Social Security Act, as added by section 5001 of the CARES Act.
2
cost cannot lawfully be funded using a line item, allotment, or allocation within that budget or (b) the cost
is for a substantially different use from any expected use of funds in such a line item, allotment, or
allocation.
The “most recently approved” budget refers to the enacted budget for the relevant fiscal period for the
particular government, without taking into account subsequent supplemental appropriations enacted or
other budgetary adjustments made by that government in response to the COVID-19 public health
emergency. A cost is not considered to have been accounted for in a budget merely because it could be
met using a budgetary stabilization fund, rainy day fund, or similar reserve account.
Costs incurred during the period that begins on March 1, 2020, and ends on December 30, 2020
Finally, the CARES Act provides that payments from the Fund may only be used to cover costs that were
incurred during the period that begins on March 1, 2020, and ends on December 30, 2020 (the “covered
period”). Putting this requirement together with the other provisions discussed above, section 601(d) may
be summarized as providing that a State, local, or tribal government may use payments from the Fund
only to cover previously unbudgeted costs of necessary expenditures incurred due to the COVID–19
public health emergency during the covered period.
Initial guidance released on April 22, 2020, provided that the cost of an expenditure is incurred when the
recipient has expended funds to cover the cost. Upon further consideration and informed by an
understanding of State, local, and tribal government practices, Treasury is clarifying that for a cost to be
considered to have been incurred, performance or delivery must occur during the covered period but
payment of funds need not be made during that time (though it is generally expected that this will take
place within 90 days of a cost being incurred). For instance, in the case of a lease of equipment or other
property, irrespective of when payment occurs, the cost of a lease payment shall be considered to have
been incurred for the period of the lease that is within the covered period, but not otherwise.
Furthermore, in all cases it must be necessary that performance or delivery take place during the covered
period. Thus the cost of a good or service received during the covered period will not be considered
eligible under section 601(d) if there is no need for receipt until after the covered period has expired.
Goods delivered in the covered period need not be used during the covered period in all cases. For
example, the cost of a good that must be delivered in December in order to be available for use in January
could be covered using payments from the Fund. Additionally, the cost of goods purchased in bulk and
delivered during the covered period may be covered using payments from the Fund if a portion of the
goods is ordered for use in the covered period, the bulk purchase is consistent with the recipient’s usual
procurement policies and practices, and it is impractical to track and record when the items were used. A
recipient may use payments from the Fund to purchase a durable good that is to be used during the current
period and in subsequent periods if the acquisition in the covered period was necessary due to the public
health emergency.
Given that it is not always possible to estimate with precision when a good or service will be needed, the
touchstone in assessing the determination of need for a good or service during the covered period will be
reasonableness at the time delivery or performance was sought, e.g., the time of entry into a procurement
contract specifying a time for delivery. Similarly, in recognition of the likelihood of supply chain
disruptions and increased demand for certain goods and services during the COVID-19 public health
emergency, if a recipient enters into a contract requiring the delivery of goods or performance of services
by December 30, 2020, the failure of a vendor to complete delivery or services by December 30, 2020,
will not affect the ability of the recipient to use payments from the Fund to cover the cost of such goods
or services if the delay is due to circumstances beyond the recipient’s control.
3
This guidance applies in a like manner to costs of subrecipients. Thus, a grant or loan, for example,
provided by a recipient using payments from the Fund must be used by the subrecipient only to purchase
(or reimburse a purchase of) goods or services for which receipt both is needed within the covered period
and occurs within the covered period. The direct recipient of payments from the Fund is ultimately
responsible for compliance with this limitation on use of payments from the Fund.
Nonexclusive examples of eligible expenditures
Eligible expenditures include, but are not limited to, payment for:
1. Medical expenses such as:
• COVID-19-related expenses of public hospitals, clinics, and similar facilities.
• Expenses of establishing temporary public medical facilities and other measures to increase
COVID-19 treatment capacity, including related construction costs.
• Costs of providing COVID-19 testing, including serological testing.
• Emergency medical response expenses, including emergency medical transportation, related
to COVID-19.
• Expenses for establishing and operating public telemedicine capabilities for COVID-19-
related treatment.
2. Public health expenses such as:
• Expenses for communication and enforcement by State, territorial, local, and Tribal
governments of public health orders related to COVID-19.
• Expenses for acquisition and distribution of medical and protective supplies, including
sanitizing products and personal protective equipment, for medical personnel, police officers,
social workers, child protection services, and child welfare officers, direct service providers
for older adults and individuals with disabilities in community settings, and other public
health or safety workers in connection with the COVID-19 public health emergency.
• Expenses for disinfection of public areas and other facilities, e.g., nursing homes, in response
to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
• Expenses for technical assistance to local authorities or other entities on mitigation of
COVID-19-related threats to public health and safety.
• Expenses for public safety measures undertaken in response to COVID-19.
• Expenses for quarantining individuals.
3. Payroll expenses for public safety, public health, health care, human services, and similar
employees whose services are substantially dedicated to mitigating or responding to the COVID-
19 public health emergency.
4. Expenses of actions to facilitate compliance with COVID-19-related public health measures, such
as:
• Expenses for food delivery to residents, including, for example, senior citizens and other
vulnerable populations, to enable compliance with COVID-19 public health precautions.
• Expenses to facilitate distance learning, including technological improvements, in connection
with school closings to enable compliance with COVID-19 precautions.
• Expenses to improve telework capabilities for public employees to enable compliance with
COVID-19 public health precautions.
4
• Expenses of providing paid sick and paid family and medical leave to public employees to
enable compliance with COVID-19 public health precautions.
• COVID-19-related expenses of maintaining state prisons and county jails, including as relates
to sanitation and improvement of social distancing measures, to enable compliance with
COVID-19 public health precautions.
• Expenses for care for homeless populations provided to mitigate COVID-19 effects and
enable compliance with COVID-19 public health precautions.
5. Expenses associated with the provision of economic support in connection with the COVID-19
public health emergency, such as:
• Expenditures related to the provision of grants to small businesses to reimburse the costs of
business interruption caused by required closures.
• Expenditures related to a State, territorial, local, or Tribal government payroll support
program.
• Unemployment insurance costs related to the COVID-19 public health emergency if such
costs will not be reimbursed by the federal government pursuant to the CARES Act or
otherwise.
6. Any other COVID-19-related expenses reasonably necessary to the function of government that
satisfy the Fund’s eligibility criteria.
Nonexclusive examples of ineligible expenditures 3
The following is a list of examples of costs that would not be eligible expenditures of payments from the
Fund.
1. Expenses for the State share of Medicaid.4
2. Damages covered by insurance.
3. Payroll or benefits expenses for employees whose work duties are not substantially dedicated to
mitigating or responding to the COVID-19 public health emergency.
4. Expenses that have been or will be reimbursed under any federal program, such as the
reimbursement by the federal government pursuant to the CARES Act of contributions by States
to State unemployment funds.
5. Reimbursement to donors for donated items or services.
6. Workforce bonuses other than hazard pay or overtime.
7. Severance pay.
8. Legal settlements.
3 In addition, pursuant to section 5001(b) of the CARES Act, payments from the Fund may not be expended for an
elective abortion or on research in which a human embryo is destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of
injury or death. The prohibition on payment for abortions does not apply to an abortion if the pregnancy is the result
of an act of rape or incest; or in the case where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or
physical illness, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, that
would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed.
Furthermore, no government which receives payments from the Fund may discriminate against a health care entity
on the basis that the entity does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.
4 See 42 C.F.R. § 433.51 and 45 C.F.R. § 75.306.