City staff outlines hundreds of active projects, asks council to let departments rank and return priorities

City administrators presented an inventory of ongoing and proposed projects—capital works (wells, water tanks, booster stations, a 6 MGD wastewater upgrade), initiatives (observatory, public safety master planning, city hall/facilities), and operational demands—and asked council whether staff should rank projects by departmental priority to produce a consolidated list for council review.

The administrator framed priorities around a foundation of public safety, infrastructure and sustainable revenue and described staffing as roughly one‑third the size of comparable cities. He asked for council direction: should staff prepare ranked lists by department (1–15) and return a consolidated recommendation for council adjustment? Councilmembers suggested staff include man‑hours, likely funding sources, and critical timing (e.g., wastewater capacity) so the council can weigh tradeoffs and consider adding staff if necessary. One councilmember urged staff to flag projects suitable to drop (for example projects lacking funding) to avoid chasing low‑probability items.

Council generally supported staff preparing a prioritized list with estimated man‑hours and funding sources and returning with options during the budget process.

What’s next: staff will rank projects at the department level, estimate man‑hours and funding sources, and bring a consolidated, tweakable list to council for final prioritization ahead of budget deliberations.