New Mexico Colonias Initiative & Trust Fund

2012

Presented by

Medius, Inc.

Definition of a Colonia

Unites State Department of Housing and Urban Development

“... a rural community located within 150 miles of the US-Mexican Border. They often lack the basic necessities most Americans take for granted – running water, electricity, and paved roads. These mostly unincorporated communities began to be developed in the 1950s and continue to exist for a variety of reasons, such as poor land use regulations. Without safe, sanitary and affordable housing, drinkable water, sewer and drainage systems, colonias struggle with issues often associated with Third World countries.”

Background of the Colonias Initiative (CI)

In New Mexico, there are 150 designated colonias.

The combined population in this area represents 24.97% of the entire state’s population with an average poverty rate higher than the state average of 18%.

These communities are eligible for reserved federal funding under the 1990 Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act.

Background of the Colonias Initiative (CI)

Began in 2005, as a financial collaboration among local, state, and federal governments, in cooperation with community partners.

To date, CI has leverages over $129 million to transform New Mexico's colonias into economically and socially viable communities.

Purpose of CI The Initiative was a vital resource for

Southern New Mexico colonias for improving rural economic development, safety, health, and quality of life for rural colonias and community residents.

The Trust Fund will provide a permanent fund for the transformation process for colonias communities in the 11 southermost counties of NM.

Elements of Focus for CI

Identified Critical Elements of a Strong Community

Long-term land use planning and zoning Flood control and drainage Property platting and rectifying

encroachment issues Water and wastewater infrastructure Roads Housing

Colonias Initiative & Trust Fund Priorities & Criteria

SB 279—The Creation of the Colonias Trust Fund

• A permanent source of funding program and to establish a fair and equitable mechanism through which colonias designated communities will have access to state funds.

• The Trust Fund will be administered by NMFA commencing in 2012. The Fund’s elements:

Colonias Trust Fund• Allocates Severance Tax bonding capacity authorizing 5%

of the Senior Severance Tax Bonds to fund the Trust (Approx. $10 million in 2012);

• A funding structure that will provide funding availability to disadvantaged communities in the 11 Southernmost NM Counties;

• Establish a revolving fund mechanism through a loan component which will allow the Trust to fund itself.

• In addition to helping bridge the funding gap, the Trust Fund will also provide a matching fund opportunity and a source of state leverage funding source to continue to attract federal funds to colonias designated areas.

Colonias Trust Fund BoardThe board of a 12 member board is made up of two

groups, the voting board includes 7 members: NMFA chief executive officert or designee, DFA Secretary or designee, NMED Secretary or designee, 2 members each from House & Senate representing both parties and representing colonias communities. The second group is composed by 6 non-voting advisory members representing—3 Council of Governments Directors representing the 11 Southern Counties where colonias exist, one member from MFA and one member from the NM Association of Counties.

Critical Elements of Success The selection criterion for Colonias Initiative

grants is based on the following: Fund/Source Leverage Technical Readiness Long Term Economic Impact Population Impact Long Term Regional Infrastructure Impact Project Urgency Success of previous Colonias Initiative

monies received.

Scoring Elements

Scoring Scale In general, all criteria will be graded using

the same measure

5: Significantly exceeds criterion identified (high score)

4: Exceeds criterion identified

3: Meets basic criterion identified

2: Falls below meeting criterion identified

1: Does not meet criterion identified (low score)

Criteria Explained

Funding/ Source Leverage: Have other avenues of funding been secured?

Grading Scale:

5: Project has leveraged more than a 1:1 match

4: Project has leveraged a 1:1 match

3: Project has leveraged at least 75% fund match

2: Project has leveraged at least 50% fund match

1: Project has leveraged less than 25% fund match

Criteria Explained

Technical Readiness: How quickly can the project/phase get started

Grading Scale:

5: The project is technically researched and prepared to be completed in less than 6 months

4: The project is technically researched and prepared to be completed in 6-12 months

3: The project is technically researched and prepared to be completed in 12-18 months

2: The project is technically researched and may be completed in 18-24 months

1: The project is technically feasible and may be completed in more than 24 months

Criteria Explained

Long Term Economic Impact: How will this positively influence the future development of the community?

Grading Scale:

5: The project will provide significant economic improvement to region/area

4: The project will provide substantial economic improvement to region/area

3: The project will provide some economic improvement to region/area

2: The project will provide little economic improvement to region/area

1: The project will provide no economic improvement to region/area

Criteria Explained

Population Impact: What is the size of the population this project is expected to affect?

Grading Scale:

5: This project will impact greater than 1000 people

4: This project will impact between 500-1000 people

3: This project will impact 100-500 people

2: This project will impact 50-100 people

1: This project will impact less than 50 people

Criteria Explained

Long Term Regional Infrastructure: How well does this project work toward an all-encompassing approach to future planning?

Grading Scale:

5: The project significantly lends itself to a regionalized approach to resolving problem

4: The project substantially lends itself to a regionalized approach to resolving problem

3: The project somewhat lends itself to a regionalized approach to resolving problem

2: The project may lend itself to a regionalized approach to resolving problem

1: The project does not lend itself to a regionalized approach to resolving problem

Criteria Explained

Project Urgency: In terms of community health and safety, how big of a problem is presented, and how well does the project address it

Grading Scale:

5: The project resolves an acute health and safety concern for the community and is needed immediately

4: The project resolves a health and safety issue for the community and is need soon

3: The project improves a health and safety issue for the community

2: The project improves community infrastructure and health and safety could improve over time

1: The project improves community infrastructure

The Good, The Okay, and The Ugly

The Good: Contains full

description and is realistic in nature

Attached graphics, maps, etc. are beneficial to discussion

Example

The Good, The Okay, and The Ugly

The Okay: Typically are lacking in

information on a few points

Overly vague to ensure a quick decision

Lacks numbers to illustrate preparedness

Example

The Good, The Okay, and The Ugly

The Ugly:

Have a lack of detail – missing or skipping all aspects of questions

Exhibit a lack of preparedness for projects or a demonstrate a problem bigger than the one addressed

Example

Budgets: What's Expected

• Project budget totals will match totals in matching funds section

• Estimates for work will be accompanied with documentation

• Budgets should be detailed and thorough

• Note: Previous Colonias Initiative funding use will be factored into the decision to award

Budgets: What's Expected

Questions?We have answers!

Next Steps