Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF PARIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN <br />APPerid1X A-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM PROCESS <br />Revenue Source - Some projects may receive a higher rating because of the way in <br />which they can be funded. For example, a project funded by a revenue stream unique <br />to that project may be rated more highly than one that requires general obligation <br />debt. In addition, projects that are funded by an equitable distribution of monies <br />based upon impact may also rate more highly than one that requires an unfair <br />collection of funds. As each project is considered, based upon the above described <br />factors, some projects may rate highly under each category, some may rate well in <br />some categories and less well in others, and some projects may receive no rating <br />within a given category. This system attempts to provide a degree of objectivity to a <br />process that is often as much art as science. However, if carefully followed, the <br />Comprehensive Plan should be implemented, public trust should be enhanced, and <br />limited public funds should be expended in a more efficient manner, hopefully <br />encouraging complimentary investments from other sources. <br />Finally, both the relative weight placed on a rating category and financial limitation <br />are important elements to the review process. Consequently, it would be helpful if <br />the City Council, as the primary policy makers of the City, would provide guidance <br />on the availability of funds for capital improvements programming. As the process <br />continues over time, the Planning Commission will become better able to make <br />recommendations to the City Council; they will better understand the funding <br />limitations, become more aware of the needs for an emergency fund reserve, and, <br />hopefully, become better informed concerning the differences between "planning" <br />decisions and "political" decisions. <br />SA98288\WPOfinal rcNrt 2-01.doc 84 BWR <br />