My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council Work Session - 02/24/2003
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council Work Session
>
2003
>
Agenda - Council Work Session - 02/24/2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 3:45:32 PM
Creation date
4/25/2003 9:56:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
02/24/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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).
View images
View plain text
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />Topic Report: Capital <br />Improvement/Capital Outlay Plan <br />By: James E. Norman, City Administrator <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />Capital Improvement/Capital Outlay Plan. The CIP has been prepared in an attempt <br />to anticipate major capital expenditures in advance of the year in which they are budget <br />requests. Further, several projects may interrelate or require other improvements prior to <br />initiation which would cause delays without prior planning. Additionally, projects may <br />require budgeting over several years or receipt of funds from other sources (i.e. grants) <br />requiring planning completion prior to the funding year. Finally, the plan enables a <br />snapshot of the identified capital needs of the community allowing for continual <br />prioritization of these needs. <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 plan does not contain a specific designation which denotes project priorities. There <br />is no weighting or matching of priorities between infrastructure types [streets, parks, <br />utilities, building facilities] as each type of project generally has a funding source unique <br />to the project type and from which funds cannot be reallocated. <br /> <br />Action Statement: <br /> <br />I rovide direction to staff regarding 2003-2007 CIP. <br /> <br />CCWS: 2.24.03 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.