2A Work Session 2009 1109 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

November 9, 2009 Section 7: Implementation 7.3 Prioritization Methodology The project scoring resulted in the grouping of the projects into three implementation categories based on their relative scores. The three categories are defined as follows: ^ Near-term Actions (Scores ranging from 7 to 9): Projects that received the highest relative scores and are recommended for high priority consideration for implementation. ^ Mid-term Actions (Scores ranging from 5 to 6): Moderate relative scores and the second group of projects considered for funding and implementation. ^ Longer-term Actions (Scores ranging from 3 to 4): The lowest relative score and the third group considered for funding. Additional measure characteristics were researched by KEMA, but not included in the scoring criteria (due to the desire to keep the scoring methodology relatively simple). The following measure characteristics are included in Appendix C. ^ City savings -Any annual cost savings that will be realized by the City. ^ Residentiallbusiness costs -Summary of costs that will be primarily shouldered by households and local businesses. ^ Residential/business savings -Potential for cost savings that households and local businesses will achieve through implementation of the measure. ^ Potential funding sources -Assessment of potential funding sources and grants that may be available to offset measure costs. ^ Other co-benefits -Other benefits to the community, including job creation, air quality and achievement of other City goals and objectives. 7.4 Actions Recommended for Implementation While short-term priorities are illustrated, please note that priorities can and do shift based on funding availability, advances in technology, new and better ideas and other reasons. ~ F'~"y+~y~~ Page 57 v ~1y ~~