My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Reso 2020-3100
SIBFL
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Regular
>
2020
>
Reso 2020-3100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2024 2:46:30 PM
Creation date
10/13/2020 12:00:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CityClerk-Resolutions
Resolution Type
Resolution
Resolution Number
2020-3100
Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
09/17/2020
Description
Approving Interlocal Agrmnt for Federally-funded Subaward w/ Miami-Dade County for Reimbursement COVID-19.
Supplemental fields
Comment
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Could Fund payments be used for capital improvement projects that broadly provide potential <br />economic development in a community? <br />In general, no. If capital improvement projects are not necessary expenditures incurred due to the <br />COVID-19 public health emergency, then Fund payments may not be used for such projects. <br />However, Fund payments may be used for the expenses of, for example, establishing temporary public <br />medical facilities and other measures to increase COVID-19 treatment capacity or improve mitigation <br />measures, including related construction costs. <br />The Guidance includes workforce bonuses as an example of ineligible expenses but provides that <br />hazard pay would be eligible if otherwise determined to be a necessary expense. Is there a specific <br />definition of "hazard pay"? <br />Hazard pay means additional pay for performing hazardous duty or work involving physical hardship, in <br />each case that is related to COVID-19. <br />The Guidance provides that ineligible expenditures include "[pjayroll or benefits expenses for <br />employees whose work duties are not substantially dedicated to mitigating or responding to the <br />COVID-19 public health emergency." Is this intended to relate only to public employees? <br />Yes. This particular nonexclusive example of an ineligible expenditure relates to public employees. A <br />recipient would not be permitted to pay for payroll or benefit expenses of private employees and any <br />financial assistance (such as grants or short-term loans) to private employers are not subject to the <br />restriction that the private employers' employees must be substantially dedicated to mitigating or <br />responding to the COVID-19 public health emergency. <br />May counties pre pay with CARES Act funds for expenses such as a one or two year facility lease, <br />such as to house staff hired in response to COVID-19? <br />A government should not make prepayments on contracts using payments from the Fund to the extent that <br />doing so would not be consistent with its ordinary course policies and procedures. <br />Must a stay-at-home order or other public health mandate be in effect in order for a government to <br />provide assistance to small businesses using payments from the Fund? <br />No. The Guidance provides, as an example of an eligible use of payments from the Fund, expenditures <br />related to the provision of grants to small businesses to reimburse the costs of business interruption <br />caused by required closures. Such assistance may be provided using amounts received from the Fund in <br />the absence of a requirement to close businesses if the relevant government determines that such <br />expenditures are necessary in response to the public health emergency. <br />Page 6 of 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.