HomeMy WebLinkAboutMontana Department of Commerce (3)June 1,2006
Kenneth Olson
City of Laurel
115 W. First Street
Laurel, MT 59044
M N TANA
Department of Commerce
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
P.O Box200523 * Helena, Montana59620-0523
Phone: 406-841-2770 * Fax: 406-841-2771
P.O. Box 10
Dear Mayor Olson:
This letter is to acknowledge that the Montana Department of Commerce (MDOC) has received
your application requesting a construction grant from the Treasure State Endowment Program
(TSEP). The program received 57 applications requesting approximately $33 million in TSEP
construction grant funds. I have enclosed a list of the applications received by the program and
the amount each has requested. At this point, we are estimating that the 2007 Legislatu~ will
have available approximately $17 million or more to award for grants. However, we will not know
how many projects we can recommend for funding until we receive the official projections by the
Legislature's Revenue Oversight Committee and the Governor's Budget and Program Planning
Office in November
The Department has contracted with several engineering firms to perform an evaluation of the
preliminary engineering information included in the TSEP applications. We believe that the
process that MDOCFrSEP uses to evaluate and score applications, keeps the process as fair
and equitable as possible, and reduces to a negligible level any concerns regarding conflicts of
interest. The review engineer's guidelines for evaluating and scoring the TSEP applications can
be viewed on the Community Development Division's web page
(http://comdev. mt.,qov/CDD TSEP.asp) under "Resources," then "Ranking Information," and
finally, "Review Engineer's Guidelines."
These engineers will be evaluating the technical aspects of your application (the preliminary
engineering) and preparing a report that will be used as the basis for scodng statutory priorities
#1 and #3. A draft report will be mailed to you on approximately July 25th to provide you with an
opportunity to point out any misinterpretations of the facts or to identify something that the review
engineer may have overlooked. You will also be allowed to submit a statement Waen you retum
your comments in order to call attention to a health orsafety issue(s) that in your opinion has not
been adequately emphasized by the review engineer and could impact the scoring of priority #1.
The statement will be limited to no more than 150 words and will be inserted verbatim within the
draft report for the other review engineers' consideration. However, you wilt not be allowed to
introduce any new information that was not previously submitted with the application either in the
statement or your comments on the draft report; new information :included in the statement may
be edited out at the discretion of MDOC. In addition, ourstaff engineer will also be reviewing
several of the preliminary engineer reports and may also request that you respond to any
comments he may have about the technical aspects of your application.: Any comments that
you may have on the review en,qineer's draft report or comments from the TSEP engineer
must be received by MDOC no later than August 14~. You can email your comments and a
bdef statement to Richard Knatterud, TSEP engineer, at rknatterud@mt.gov, or mail a computer
disk with the information. You should ensure that your project engineer is available dudng this
time pedod to review the report and provide comments. Your engineer's failure to be available
to review the draft report will not be grounds for an extension of time.
On September 11th, our consulting engineers and the MDOC staff will meet as a group to score
statutory priorities #1 and #3 for the bdd.qe applications. All of the other types of projects will
have statutory priorities #1 and #3 scored on September 12th through the 15th. The
MDOC/'I'SEP ranking team will meet between September 18th and 22nd, to score statutory
priorities ~4 through #7. All ofthese scodng sessions are open to public observation. However,
absolutely no comments bythe public will be permitted during the project discussion and scodng
process. We also encourage you, and especially your project engineer, to observe the scodng
of statutory priorities #1 and #3, This is a good learning opportunity for engineers with regard to
how to properly prepare a preliminary engineering report.
The Department's recommendations will be presented to the Govemor in October. Once the
Governor approves the recommendations the results will be mailed to all applicants. The
Governor's recommendations will be presented to the 2007 Legislature, where the final award
decision will be determined. In the past, the Legislatu~ has held a hearing on each application
and applicants have had the opportunity to provide testimony on their project. We assume that
the Legislature will continue with this practice and we strongly recommend that you plan to
attend and speak on behalf of your project.
My compliments to you for the hard work and commitment you have put into your TSEP
application. If you have any questions about the TSEP ranking process, you can call me at 841-
2785 or email me at jedgcomb(~rnt.gov.
Jim Edgcomb, Manager
Treasure State Endowment Program
c: Scott Murphy
Enclosure: List of TSEP Applications
] Bainville, Town of Wastewater $450,000
Big Sandy, Town of Wastewater $750,000
Bigfork Co. W&S Dist. Wastewater $750,000
Black Eagle W&S Dist. Water $365,000
Blaine Co. Bridge $617,017
Brady Co. Water & Sewer Dist. Wastewater $750,000
Butte-Silver Bow Water $750,000
Cartar-Chouteau Co. W&S Dist. Water $750 000
Circle, Town of Wastewater $750 000
Columbia Falls Wastewater $750 000
Wastewater $750 000
11 Crow Tribe for Crow Agency
12 Custer co.
Bridge $63 750
] 3 Cut Bank, City of Water $550 000
1 4 Darby, Town of Water $750 000
1 5 Dayton-Lake Co. W&S Dist. Wastewater $750 000
1 6 Ekalaka, Town of W & WW $706 369
] 7 Elk Meadows Ranchettes Co. Water Dist. Water $410 000
] 8 Fairfield, Town of Wastewater $750 000
1 ? Fergus Co. Bridge $238 362
20 Fort Benton, City of Storm Water $750 000
21 Goodan-Keil Co. Water Dist. Water $532 250
22 Hamilton, City of Wastewater $750 000
23 Harlem, City of Water $750,000
24 Hebgen Lake Estates (Gallatin Co.) Wastewater $750,000
25 Jefferson Co. Bridge $295,800
26 Jordan, Town of Sewer $700,000
27 Judith Basin Co. Bridge $192,215
28 Laurel, City of Wastewater $750,000
2? Lewis & Clark Co. Water $596,420
30 Loma Co. W&S Dist. Water $750,000
31 Madison Co. Bridge $370,100
32 Manhattan, Town of Water $750,000
33 Mineral Co. Saltese W&S Dist. Wastewater $750,000
34 Missoula Co. (Lolo) Wastewater $750,000
3,.5 Neihart, Town of Water $223,000
36 North Valley Co. W&S Dist. Water $750,000
37 Panoramic Mountain River Heights Co. Water Dist. Water $191,500
38 Pinesdale, Town of Water $750,000
3? Poison, City of Water $750,000
40 Powell Co. Bridge $263,074
4] Power-Teton Co. W&S Dist. Water $604,286
42 Rae Water & Sewer Dist. Water $450,000
43 Red Lodge, City of Water $750,000
44 Seeley Lake - Missoula Co. Water Dist. Water $750,000
45 Shelby, City of Water $750,000
46 Sheridan, Town of Wastewater $750,000
47 Stillwater Co. Bridge $407,500
48 Sunny Meadows Missoula County W&S Dist. Water $325,000
40 Superior, Town of Water $600,000
.50 Sweet Grass Co. Bridge $151,493
,51 Thompson Falls, City of Water $363,000
.52 Three Forks, City of Wastewater $750,000
.53 Tri County Water & Sewer Dist. Water $313,500
.54 Twin Bridges, Town of Wastewater $750,000
,5,5 Whitefish, City of Water $750,000
,56 Whitehall, Town of Wastewater $750,000
,57 Yellowstone Co.
Bridge $97,079
Totals: $33,326,715