Section 50.42. Maximum cost-share rates.

 

(1)   Maximum cost-share rate.

(a) Except as provided under pars. (b) to (e) , cost-share payments funded under this chapter may not exceed 70% of the total eligible costs allowed under s. ATCP 50.40 (4) to install and maintain the conservation practice for the period specified in the cost-share contract. This paragraph does not limit the use of cost-share funds from other sources.

(b) The maximum cost-share rate under par. (a) is 90% if there is an economic hardship under sub. (4) .

(bm) The economic hardship provision under sub. (4) is available to owners and grant recipients who operate farms and is not available to non-farmers.

(c) For cropping practices identified in sub. (2) , a county land conservation committee may pay up to the amount authorized under this subsection or sub. (2) , whichever is higher.

(d) For more than ½ acre of riparian land taken out of agricultural production to install a conservation practice, a county land conservation committee may pay a qualified landowner up to the CREP-equivalent amount authorized in s. ATCP 50.08 (4) if that amount exceeds the relevant amount authorized under this subsection.

(dg) The cost-share payments for the following conservation practices may not exceed 50% of the total eligible costs to install and maintain the practice unless the landowner is required to install the practice to achieve compliance with an agricultural performance standard on cropland, pastures, or a livestock operation:

1. Access roads under s. ATCP 50.65 .

2. Roof runoff systems under s. ATCP 50.85 .

3. Streambank or shoreline protection under s. ATCP 50.88 .

4. Stream crossing under s. ATCP 50.885 .

5. Wetland development or restoration under s. ATCP 50.98 .

(dr) The cost-share payments for any conservation practice installed on land owned by a local governmental unit may not exceed 50% of the total eligible costs to install and maintain the practice.

(e) A county land conservation committee may provide cost-share funds, at the rate authorized under this subsection, to replace a cost-shared conservation practice that is damaged or destroyed by natural causes beyond the landowner's control.

(2)   Cropping practices; maximum cost-share amounts. A county land conservation committee may pay up to the following amounts for the installation or maintenance of the following cropping practices:

(a) For contour farming, $9 per acre per year.

(b) For cover crop, $25 per acre per year.

(c) For stripcropping, $13.50 per acre per year.

(d) For field stripcropping, $7.50 per acre per year.

(e) For high residue management systems, no-till systems, ridge till systems, and mulch till systems, $18.50 per acre per year.

(f) For conservation plantings in riparian buffers, $100 per acre per year.

(g) For nutrient management and pesticide management, $7.00 per acre per year.

(3)   Maximum grant to relocate animal feeding operation. No cost-share grant to relocate an animal feeding operation may exceed 70% of the estimated cost to install a manure management system or related practices needed to resolve or prevent water quality problems at the abandoned site, or 70% of the eligible relocation costs at the new site, whichever site cost is less. Not more than $5,000 of the cost-share grant may be used to transport livestock from the abandoned site to the new site.

(4)   Economic hardship. A landowner of a farm operation qualifies for economic hardship treatment if all the following apply:

(a) A certified public accountant or accredited financial institution certifies all the following to the county land conservation committee, based on a farm financial statement prepared according to generally accepted accounting principles:

1. The landowner is unable to make the cost-share contribution normally required of a landowner under sub. (1) .

2. The landowner will be able to pay the balance of the cost to install the cost-shared practice if the landowner receives cost-sharing at the economic hardship rate.

(b) The landowner certifies, in a sworn affidavit to the county land conservation committee, that the landowner has provided to the certified public accountant or accredited financial institution under par. (a) a full and true disclosure of the landowner's financial condition, including a copy of the landowner's latest federal tax return. The landowner shall make the affidavit on a form provided by the department.

(5)   Review of economic hardship determination. The department may review of an economic hardship determination under sub. (4) . The landowner and the person certifying the economic hardship shall make available for department inspection or copying, at the department's request, documents used to support the economic hardship determination. The department may invalidate a determination that fails to comply with standards under sub. (4) .

CR 01-090 : cr. Register September 2002 No. 561 , eff. 10-1-02; CR 08-075 : am. (2) (b) to (d) Register April 2009 No. 640 , eff. 5-1-09; CR 13-016 : cr. (1) (bm), (dg), (dr), am. (4) (intro.) Register February 2014 No. 698 , eff. 5-1-14.

Note

The maximum cost-share rates in this section and other sections were established to meet the requirements of s. 281.16 (3) (e) , Stats., which provides that an owner or operator of an agricultural facility may not be required by the state or a municipality to comply with the performance standards, prohibitions, conservation practices, or technical standards unless cost-sharing is available for at least 70% of the cost of compliance, or is 70% to 90% of the cost of compliance in cases of economic hardship. These maximum cost-share rates are not required for the practices specified in s. ATCP 50.42 (1) (dg) and (dr) . Microsoft Windows NT 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 County employees and land conservation committee members are subject to the conflict of interest provisions of s. ATCP 50.40 (19) when providing cost-sharing to the local governmental units with which they are affiliated. Microsoft Windows NT 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 See s. ATCP 50.08 and s. 92.14 (6) (gm) , Stats. Paragraphs (c) and (d) provide "short-cut" alternatives for determining cost-share payments in some cases. These methods do not require a case-by-case computation of "cost." A county is not required to use these alternative methods, except as provided in s. ATCP 50.08 (4) . Microsoft Windows NT 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 For example, a cost-share contract might pay a farmer up to $36 per acre to install and maintain a contour farming system for 4 years ($9 per year). The county would pay the full contract amount when the contour system was installed, and the farmer would have a contract obligation to maintain the system for at least 4 years. Microsoft Windows NT 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1 The department will not copy records inspected under sub. (5) unless the department contests the validity of a determination under sub. (4) based on those records. If it becomes necessary for the department to copy records under sub. (5), the department will seek to protect those records from public disclosure. Microsoft Windows NT 6.1.7601 Service Pack 1