Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council presses consultants for map, scoring and who pays for drainage projects
Summary
Council members asked how the master plan’s ranking was derived, whether a public map will show each ranked project, and whether cost estimates are city obligations; staff said the master plan will include per‑project sheets with ranks, costs and locations and that the slides shown were conceptual.
Council members asked several clarifying questions after the drainage master plan presentation about how projects were ranked, whether the map displayed the top ranked projects, and whether listed costs represent city responsibility. Council member Perrette Parker asked for a clearer tie between the project list and the map and whether the ranking numbers would be published; consultants said the map shown contained concept information for only the top five projects and that the full master plan will include a sheet for each project with its ranking, cost estimate and location.
A city staff member explained the scoring matrix used to create the rank: categories are weighted and tallied (for example, potential loss of life carries the highest weight and bank erosion is a separate weighted category), and the consultants confirmed the rank column in the report will state the computed ranking. When asked whether the dollar figures are the city’s obligation, consultants clarified that the projects presented on those slides were city projects, and that grant programs with varying match requirements could offset city costs.
