02-B Comprehensive Plan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF PARIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Apperid1X A-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM PROCESS Political Considerations - Political reality is a part of the capital improvements programming process. Consequently, consideration should be given to projects that achieve campaign promises, encourage intergovernmental cooperation, andlor implement federal or state mandates. Geogrnphic Distribution - It is difficult for a CIP to be successful over the long-term if all projects are concentrated within a limited area. Consequently, both the historical and current year distributions of projects should be considered in the ranking process. Clearly, the future land use plan of the current Comprehensive Plan update should direct the public policy here. Investment, for example, where sewer interceptors are planned or under construction within a single drainage basin-or phased to coordinate among two or three basins-should be a guiding factor. Timing - It is critical to allow financing of timely projects, such as matching funds for state grants. The CIP process should be flexible and re-evaluated to accommodate such circumstances; and the availability of such funds should be factored into the ranking. Private sector initiative should be evaluated and support with public projects, so that growth is served adequately. Investment Opportunities Term - Consideration should be given to whether the implementation of a project has an immediate impact on the community. Characteristics of the Investment - Some projects, by their very nature, affect competition in the market place. For example, a major capital improvement, funded by the community at-large, for a retail-commercial development, should not be given as high a ranking score as one for industrial development. The City has a high degree of interest in maintaining its role as a regional center in East Texas industrial market place and such an investment could provide one developer an unfair advantage over another. Public investment to encourage industrial development is a beneficial expenditure of public revenues. Leverage - A project which leverages monies from other entities (grants, private investment, special assessments, etc.) might be rated more highly than one which must stand alone; particularly if the "window of opportunity" is small and a program must be taken advantage of immediately or be forever lost, such as T-21 or CDBG funds for public improvements. Uniqueness andlor Innovation - Some projects represent a unique opportunity to the community. These projects, then, should receive additional consideration. Debt Capacitv Availability - Clearly the ability of the community to fund improvements must be a consideration. Consequently, a project that utilizes currently budgeted funds should be rated higher than a project that requires a tax bond vote. 5A98258\V41CVma1 report 2-01.doc 83 BWR