2003 General Obligation Program Policies and Criteria

2003 GO Bond Program Introduction/Process Policies and Criteria Planning Process Funding Bond Questions Bond summary FAQ [pdf,186kb]

Every two years the City Council adopts policies and criteria for the evaluation of capital projects to be included in the general obligation bond program and the decade plan. On May 6, 2002 the City Council adopted F/S R-02-30; Enactment 34-2002 [pdf, 681kb] establishing policies and criteria for the 2003 planning cycle. Following is a summary of the provisions of that resolution.

Policy Legislation Cited

The following adopted policies of the City of Albuquerque are cited in F/S R-02-30:

• Albuquerque / Bernalillo County Comprehensive Plan
• Council Bill F/S R-70; Enactment 91-1998: Growth Policy Framework
• Council Bill R-01-344; Enactment 172-2001: Centers & Corridors

In addition the bill acknowledges the completion of the City of Albuquerque / Bernalillo County Planned Growth Strategy Study. (At the time of adoption of F/S R-02-30, Planned Growth Strategy policies had not been adopted.)

Funding Criteria

The approximate allocation of funds among the various city departments and the City Council were established in F/S R-02-30 as follows:

• 30% to the streets divisions of the Public Works Department
• 11.5% to the Hydrology (Storm Drainage) Division of the Public Works Department
• 5% to the Transit Department
• 10% to the Parks and Recreation Department, which includes the Open Space Division
• 10% to Public Safety, including the Police and Fire departments
• 25.5% to all other Community Facilities, including: Cultural Services Department; Environmental Health Department; Family and Community Services Department; Department of Finance and Administrative Services; planning Department; and the Department of Senior Affairs
• 7% to the Council-Neighborhood Set-Aside program.

Please refer to the Funding Allocation Chart [pdf, 428kb] for the approved allocation of the 2003 general obligation bond program.

Project Selection Criteria

Specific project selection criteria were adopted in F/S R-02-30 for each funding allocation category and were written to incorporate the growth policy and fiscal goals established in the enabling legislation. To review these criteria in detail, please refer to the Decade Plan Criteria [pdf, 400kb].

Minimize Operation Budget Impact

In order to minimize the impact of capital projects on the general fund operating budget, to emphasize the preservation of existing assets, and to remediate critical deficiencies, F/S R-02-30 establishes that 90% of the G.O. bond program will be restricted to rehabilitation and deficiency remediation projects.

As shown in the Rehabilitation/Maintenance and Deficiency Remediation Summary [pdf, 380kb], 89% of the 2003 G.O. bond program meets this requirement. A further 1% of the program is comprised of mandated projects. Mandated projects are those that are required by federal, state or local laws or regulation. An analysis of operating impacts associated with capital projects can be found in the Operating and Maintenance Cost Impacts [pdf, 20kb] table.

Project Categorization

As part of the planning process, the Administration is required to categorize projects in the Mayor's recommended Capital Program as: growth, rehabilitation, deficiency, mandate or improvements, defined as follows:

• Growth: New facilities, component additions, or system upgrades that provide service or capacity for new customers (defined as customers not currently using the system); or that restore needed reserves previously used to support new users.
• Rehabilitation: Projects that extend the service life of an existing facility or system, or that restore original performance or capacity by rehabilitating or replacing system components.
• Deficiency: Projects that correct inadequate service, provide system backup capability, or minimize downtime or loss of service ability. Inadequate service shall be defined by a level of service standard, and the proposed project shall be designed to measurably improve the level of service within the area of the project.
• Improvements: Projects that enhance the efficiency or customer satisfaction of an existing system that are not covered in the above categories, including costs to conduct special studies directly related to the implementation of the capital program.
• Mandate: Projects that are required in order to comply with regulation(s) of federal, state, or local jurisdictions.
  

Project Area

A boundary based on the water line extension policy contained in Council Bill R-390, has been established. Projects outside that boundary may not be funded by the capital program. A map of this area may be found in the Water Infrastructure Zone map [pdf, 40kb].

High, Medium and Low Priority Projects

All projects proposed for the 2003 G.O. bond cycle are required to be rated by a staff committee using the criteria provided in F/S R-02-30. The ratings are to be divided into high, medium and low priority, and no more than ten percent (10%) of the Mayor's proposed G.O. bond program funds may be ranked in the low category. (As provided in F/S R-02-30, Council-Neighborhood Set-Aside Projects are selected by City Councilors, and approved by vote of the full City Council. Thus, they were not reviewed, rated or ranked.)

Excluding the Council-Neighborhood Set-Aside projects, only 6% of the recommended 2003 G.O. bond program funds are derived from projects that ranked low. Download for this year's Committee's rankings [pdf, 110kb].