Laserfiche WebLink
4 methodology developed by the Council, but also factored in the priorities identified in the recent <br />35 community survey, as well as Staffs own experiences as to which programs create the greatest value for <br />36 ff the greatest number of citizens. In this second iteration, Sta was also asked to rank all city programs in an <br />37 effort to produce a composite score that would minimize any inherent bias that might be present on an <br />3, individual level. <br />39 <br />4o The composite program rankings as compiled by City Staff are included in Attachment A. <br />41 POLICY OBJECTIVE <br />42 Not applicable. <br />43 FINANCIAL IMPACTS <br />44 Not applicable. <br />45 STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />46 Not applicable. <br />47 REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION <br />48 For information purposes only. No formal Council action is requested. <br />49 <br />Prepared by: Chris Miller., Finance Director <br />Attachments: A: Budget Program Staff Rankings <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />