City staff and committee volunteers on Tuesday outlined a proposed program-management approach to the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP), recommending a staged life-cycle for projects and a prioritization matrix based on strategic drivers such as compliance, water quality, supply flexibility and resilience.

Assistant City Manager Joe Leach told the council the city will begin providing quarterly CIP updates and that staff and a water/wastewater subcommittee produced a visual template showing common stages of a typical capital construction project, from scoping and procurement through construction, commissioning and warranty/punch-list closeout.

Leach said the city currently has 47 CIP projects at various stages. The proposed framework divides project status into categories from “not started” through design, procurement, construction and commissioning so council and the public can track progress and funding across the program. The framework is intended to make it clearer why some projects move sooner than others and to aid funding and rate-study decisions.

Committee members and councilors discussed the merits of adding formal decision “gates” at several stages to provide explicit review points. Jay Koba and Gary Rose, volunteer members of the water and wastewater subcommittee, said there are naturally occurring decision points — for example, council approval to issue an RFP or to award a construction contract — and recommended the city adopt explicit prioritization criteria that compare projects against one another rather than simple high/medium/low labels.

Gary Rose said the subcommittee adapted the approach for non-water CIP projects such as civic streets and storm drains and has begun mapping dollars and projected schedules to help the finance committee understand funding implications. Council members and staff suggested the approach could extend beyond CIP to other time-bound city initiatives that have a clear beginning and end.

No formal council action was taken; staff said they will continue to refine the framework, align it with the ongoing modernization effort and return with more detailed project schedules and funding recommendations.