Iowa Administrative Code › Agency 261 - Economic Development Authority › Part X - Rural Housing Needs Assessment Grant Program › Chapter 200 - Reinvestment Districts Program › Rule 261-200.6 - Application Scoring and Determination of Benefits

Current through Register Vol. 47, No. 3, July 24, 2024
For each applicant that meets the requirements of rule
				  261-2005.
				  (15J) and that has submitted an application during the annual filing window as
				  described in subrule 200.4(3), the board will evaluate and score the proposed
				  district plan according to the criteria and process described in this
				  rule.
(1)
Scoring criteria and
				plan evaluation.
Each proposed district plan will be given a numerical
				score between 0 and 100. The higher the numerical score, the more likely the
				proposed district will be approved for designation and funding under the
				program. The scoring process will necessarily involve a subjective assessment
				of the quality of each proposed district plan as well as a consideration of how
				each proposed district plan compares to the plans proposed by other applicants.
				The criteria used to score each application and the maximum number of points
				that may be attributed to each criterion are as follows:
a. Uniqueness: 25 points. The program
				requires that the projects proposed to be undertaken must be of a unique
				nature. Therefore, the proposed district plan will be evaluated on this
				criterion in order to quantify the extent to which the projects in the proposed
				district plan are of a unique nature. The more unique the projects are, the
				more points will be received under this criterion.
b. Economic impact: 25 points. The program
				requires that the projects proposed to be undertaken must have a substantial
				beneficial impact on the economy of the state and the economy of the
				municipality. Therefore, the proposed district plan will be evaluated on this
				criterion in order to quantify the extent to which the projects in the proposed
				district plan will benefit the economy. The greater the economic impact of the
				proposed district plan, the more points will be received under this
				criterion.
c. Project feasibility:
				10 points. The program requires that funding sources for projects must be
				feasible. Therefore, the proposed district plan will be evaluated on this
				criterion in order to quantify the extent to which the funding sources of the
				proposed projects are feasible. The more feasible the funding sources for the
				proposed projects are, the more points will be received under this
				criterion.
d. Capital investment:
				10 points. The program requires that at least one project with a capital
				investment of $10 million or more be proposed. To the extent that the proposed
				district plan exceeds this minimum level of capital investment, more points
				will be received under this criterion.
e. Funding leverage: 10 points. The program
				limits the amount of new tax revenues that can be received to 35 percent of the
				total cost of all proposed projects in the proposed district plan. To the
				extent that a proposed district plan includes a financing plan in which the
				percentage of new tax revenues to be received is less than 35 percent of the
				total cost, more points will be received under this criterion.
f.Nonretail focus: 10 points. The program
				limits the amount of proposed capital investment in the district related to
				retail businesses to 50 percent of the total capital investment for all
				proposed projects in the proposed district. To the extent that a proposed
				district plan includes projects that provide cultural amenities, tourist
				attractions and accommodations, infrastructure, or quality of life
				improvements, more points will be received under this criterion.
g. Additional factors: 10 points. The program
				allows the board to establish additional criteria for the program. Therefore,
				in addition to the other criteria listed in this subrule, the board will
				consider the following additional factors:
(1) Readiness for development. The closer a
				municipality is to beginning development on a proposed district plan, the more
				points may be received under the additional factors criterion.
(2) Geographic diversity. To the extent that
				a proposed district is located in a region of the state not already funded
				under the program, more points may be received under the additional factors
				criterion. A proposed district plan that would create an additional district
				within a municipality or a request to increase the maximum benefit amount of an
				already approved district will not be viewed as enhancing geographic diversity
				and may receive fewer points under the additional factors criterion.
(3) Funding need. To the extent that a
				funding gap exists in the proposed district plan's financing, more points may
				be received under the additional factors criterion.