2009 - 2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

. CITY OF RAMSEY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT/CAPITAL OUTLA YPLAN 2009~2013 Enclosed is the Ramsey Capital Improvements/CapitalOutlay Plan (CIP) for the' years 2009-2013. It has been prepared in ~ attempt to anticipate major capital expenditures in advance of the year in which they are budget requests. Further, several' projects may interrelate or require other i~provements prior to initiation, which would qause delays without prior planning. Additionally, projects may require budgeting over several years or receipt of funds from other sources (i.e~ giants) requiring planning completion prior to the funding year. Finally, the rlan enables a snapshot of the identified' capital needs of the cornmunity allciwing for continual prioritization of these needs. . . . . . Approval of-the ctP by Council does not authorize spending or initiation of ~ given project. It does, however, provide a guide for the community for a whole array of private and public decision-making, impacted by public capital expenditures. . Therefore,. the CIP should receive ratification only if the Council perceives actions contemplated within the plan as reasonable and planned within justified time frames. It shall further be noted _hat init~al proje.ct design of publi.c infrastructure projects identified within this plan often begins two years or nore pnor to the date of constructlOn. '.' The CIP is not intended to provide for precise budgeting. Capital costs are projected as estimates. Upon each update of the plan, deletions, additions, delays, or other revisions may occur, reflecting changing community ne'eds. These changes allow for budget refinements as a particular project nears actual construction. Capital improvements are improvements to land, streets, parks, utilities and buildings. This plan shows . . improvements with revenues projected from various funding sources. Improvements from the General Fund are those requiring a tax levy, referendum or similar other authority resulting in listed' projects being less than certain. The other funding sources' (except for intergovernmental revenue - grant funds) have increased stability over the general fund projects.] . . Specific information on the funding sources'for each project is shown under the individualproje,ct. Cash flow projections are completed to examine the long-term stability of each fund and its ability to provide for planned . expenditures. . . The plan does not contain a,specific designation which would denote project priorities. There is no 'weighting or matching of priorities between infrastructure types [streets, pa,rks, utilitie.s, building facilities] as each type of project generally has a funding source unique to the project type and from which funds cannot be reallocated: . 3