My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1996 Adopted Program of Municipal Services & Capital Improvements for Fiscal Year 1996
Ramsey
>
Finance
>
Capital Improvement Program
>
1996 Adopted Program of Municipal Services & Capital Improvements for Fiscal Year 1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/4/2006 11:44:14 AM
Creation date
10/4/2006 11:31:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Finance
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
498
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />-368- <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />,I <br />I <br />\1 <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />CITY OF RAMSEY <br />CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT/CAPITAL OUTLAY PLAN <br />1996 - 2001 <br /> <br />Enclosed is the Ramsey Capital Improvements/Capital Outlay Plan (CIP) for the years 1996 <br />- 200 1. It has been prepared in an attempt to anticipate major capital expenditures in <br />advance of the year' in which they are budget requests. Further, several projects may <br />interrelate or require other, improvements prior to initiation which would cause delays <br />without prior planning. Additionally, projects may require budgeting over several years or <br />receipt of funds from other sources (i.e. grants) requiring planning completion prior to the <br />funding year. Finally, the plan enables a snapshot of the identified capital needs of the <br />community allowing for continual prioritization of these needs. <br /> <br />Approval of the CIP by Council does not authorize spending, or initiation, of a given <br />project It does, however, provide a guide for the community for a whole array of private <br />and public decision making impacted by public capital expenditures. Therefore, the CIP <br />should receive ratification only if the Council perceives actions contemplated within the <br />plan as reasonable and planned within justified time frames. It shall further be noted that <br />initial project design of public infrastructure projects identified within this plan often begins <br />two years or more prior to the date of construction. <br /> <br />The CIP is not intended to provide for precise budgeting. Capital costs are projected as <br />estimates. Upon each update of the plan, deletions, additions, delays or other revisions. <br />may occur, reflecting changing community needs. These changes allow for budget <br />refinements as a particular project nears actual construction. <br /> <br />The enclosed plan is divided into two parts. First are the capital improvements which are <br />improvements to land (streets, parks, utilities and buildings). This plan shows <br />improvements with revenues projected from various funding sources. Improvements from <br />the General Fund are those requiring a tax levy, referendum or similar other authority <br />resulting in listed projects being less than certain. The other funding sources (except for <br />intergovernmental revenue - grant funds) have an increased stability over the general fund <br />projects. <br /> <br />The second part contains specific information on funding sources. Each fund which is <br />used as revenue for CIP expenditures is identified here. Cash flow projections are <br />completed to examine the long term stability of each fund and its ability to provide for <br />planned expenditures. <br /> <br />The plan does not contain a specific designation which denotes project priorities. Within <br />each category of improvement [e.g. streets, parks, etc.] labeling occurs such as "5-1" [for <br />street project number one]. It is intended that the numerical designation provides the level <br />of priority within the infrastructure category. There is no weighting or matching of <br />priorities between infrastructure types [streets, parks, utilities, building facilities]. <br /> <br />/kas <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.