Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 06/13/1996

Home

CITY OF RAMSEY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT/CAPITAL OUTLAY PLAN 1996 200! Enclosed is the Ramsey Capital Improvements/Capital Outlay Plan (CIP) for the years 1996 - 200i. It has been prepared in an attempt to anticipam major capital exI~nclitures in advance of the year in which they are budget requests. Further, several projects may interrelate or require other improvements prior to initiation which would cause delays without prior planning. Additionally, projects may require budgeting over several years or receipt of funds from other sources (i.e. grants) requiting planning completion prior to the funding yeax. Finally, the plan enables a snapshot of the identified capital needs of the community allowing for continual prioritization of these needs. Approval of the CH:' by Council does not authorize spending, or initiation, of a 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 thc plan as reasonable and planned within justified time frames. It shall further be noted that initial project design of public infrastructure projects ~dendfied within this plan often begins two years or more prior to the date of construction. 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 needs. These changes allow for budget refinements as a particular project nears actual construction. The enclosed plan is divided into two parts. First are the capital improvements which 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 intergovemmental revenue- grant funds) have an increased stability over the general fund projects. Thc second part contains specific information on funding ~ourccs. Each fund which is used as revenue for CIP expenditures is identified here. 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 denotes project priorities. Within each category of improvement [e.g. streets, parks, etc.] labeling occurs such as "S-i" [for street project number one]. It is intended that the numerical designation provides the level of priority w/thin the infrastructure category. There is no weighting or matching of priorities between infrastructure types [streets, parks, utilities, building facilities]. /kas