2005 - 2009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITY OF RAMSEY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT/CAPITAL OUTLAY PLAN 2005-2009 Enclosed is the Ramsey Capital Improvements/Capital Outlay Plan (CIP) for the years 2005-2009. It has been prepared in an 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 improvements prior to initiation, which would cause delays without prior planningl Additionally, projects may require budgeting over several years or receipt of funds from other sources (i.e. grants) requiring planning completion prior to the funding year. Finally, the plan enables a snapshot of the identified capital needs of the communiB~ allowing for continual prioritization of these needs. Approval of the CIP by Council does not authorize spending or initiation of a given project. It does, ho;vever, provide a guide for the communi~ 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 fl.~rther be noted initial pro.jec~ design of public infrastructure projects identified within this plan often begins two years or 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. 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 intergoverm~nental revenue - grant fnnds) have increased stability over the ~eneral fund projects.] Specific information on the funding sources for each project is shown under the individual project. Cash flow projections are completed to examine the long-term stability of each 15,md and its abiiiD, 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, parks, utilities, building facilitiesI as each type of projecl get, orally has ~ funding source uni~tue to the project type and h'om which funds calmot be reallocated.