Sec. 71605.

(1) Final grant awards will be determined by the director.

(2) The department shall use the 3 factors listed in subsection (3)(a), (b), and (c) to evaluate projects. All factors are of equal importance in the evaluation of a project.

(3) Each of the 3 factors listed in subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) shall be rated exceptional, good, or fair. An exceptional rating is equal to a score of 80; a good rating is equal to a score of 60; and a fair rating is equal to a score of 10. The factors are as follows:

(a) The need for the project as determined by an overall assessment of the following:

(i) The merits of the project relative to cost in addressing 1 of the following program priorities as designated by the applicant:

(A) Infrastructure improvement.

(B) Community recreation.

(C) Tourism.

(ii) How well the project meets the following priorities:

(A) Proximity to urban areas.

(B) Attention, beyond the requirements of law, to the needs of special populations, such as minorities, senior citizens, low income individuals, and the handicapped.

(C) Impact on county and regional recreation opportunity deficiencies or identified local recreation deficiencies documented in the community recreation plan.

(b) The capability of the local unit of government to complete the project and to operate and maintain it once completed. Capability will be determined by an overall assessment of all of the following criteria:

(i) Demonstrated satisfactory performance of the local unit of government in other department grant programs.

(ii) Demonstrated ability to operate and maintain existing recreation facilities.

(iii) Assurance of funds for the maintenance and operation of the proposed project.

(iv) Demonstrated commitment to public recreation through recreation staffing and the existence of a citizen recreation board or commission.

(c) The quality of the site and project design. Quality will be determined by an overall assessment of all of the following criteria:

(i) The appropriateness of the site for the intended uses.

(ii) Clarity and detail of the development plans and the quality of the project design in terms of orientation, spacing of facilities, traffic flow, and effective use of site features.

(iii) The quality of any existing development.

(iv) The adequacy of safety and health considerations.

(v) Evaluation of the impact of proposed development on the natural environment.

(4) If the score on 2 or more projects is the same and does not determine which project should be recommended within available dollars, the department shall consider the following factors to determine priority:

(a) The amount of local recreation grants funds previously received by a local unit of government under this part.

(b) A local unit of government's need for financial assistance. Financial need will be determined by the local unit of government's rank on the distressed communities list.

(c) A local unit of government's commitment to provide more than the required 25% match.

(d) The amount of Michigan natural resources trust fund development grants and land and water conservation grants previously received by the local unit of government.

(5) If a project is determined to be eligible for a grant and the needs at the location of the project include the upgrade of drinking water systems or rest room facilities, the grant award for the project shall first be used for such upgrades at that project location.

History: Add. 1998, Act 286, Eff. Dec. 1, 1998 Popular Name: Act 451Popular Name: NREPA