Plattsburgh staff reviewed an updated five‑year capital plan at a May 15 work session, presenting new cost estimates, project timing and funding splits for water, sewer, streets, parks and beach restoration while noting several funding sources remain undetermined.

City staff said the plan shows roughly $19.5 million in FFO (facility, financial or fixed‑facility) project spending between 2026 and 2030 and includes both grant‑eligible and general‑fund items that would affect future debt service and operating costs.

The presentation matters because several large projects — including Safe Routes to School on Oak Street, the Breakerhoff Street multiuse pathway, and beach‑restoration work — are staged to avoid redoing surface work when underground water or sewer lines are replaced. Staff repeatedly emphasized that sequencing subgrade and utility work with surface improvements reduces later costs but leaves project budgets and the general fund exposure uncertain.

Most important details presented

• Oak Street Safe Routes to School: staff said design is starting and the city is awaiting a design contract; the group placed a notional $800,000 on the 2027 column for borrowing and debt‑service calculations.

• Breakerhoff Street multiuse pathway: the staff estimate shown in the plan was about $3.45 million (presented as the total project cost including infrastructure upgrades). Staff described that project as a 50/50 funding split with grants covering roughly half and the city covering the other half; separate water‑line and potential combined‑sewer work under the street are not included in the surface estimate and would add cost and sequencing complexity.

• Beach restoration and green infrastructure: staff said a design contract for the first phase of beach dunes and green infrastructure had been awarded and that the figure shown in the plan represents design and construction costs; staff proposed staging some of that work into 2027 and noted a 50/50 funding split for the grant shown.

• Penfield Park and other park projects: the plan includes an allocation tied to a grant application the city submitted previously; staff said the grant was not awarded last cycle and that the city has not applied for another grant for that project but proposed keeping the budget line in the plan pending further notice.

• City Hall stairs and other building projects: staff said money already has been borrowed for City Hall stairs and that design and roof work are underway; some building projects will draw on multiple funds via internal transfers.

Funding sources and uncertainties

Staff repeatedly noted that several projects rely on a mix of low‑interest or zero‑interest loans, state grants, CHIPS (Consolidated Local Street and Highway Improvement Program) or local paving funds. For multiple items staff said the split is at least 50% grant/loan funding but could be higher, because some costs may come from sewer or water reserves or other restricted funds.

For projects where only a surface estimate exists, staff said the city lacks full project estimates until subgrade and utility work is scoped; those additional costs could change how much the general fund or enterprise funds must cover. The presenters said they will update the plan after receiving full cost breakdowns.

Budget‑stress indicators and next steps

Staff displayed fund projections that show potential deficits under current assumptions and noted an available fund balance of about $7.6 million in the draft worksheet the group reviewed. The presenters said the projections assume modest annual assessment and revenue growth (about 2% per year in assessments and a 2.5–3% price index for cost inflation) and that personnel and headcount assumptions remain uncertain.

No formal votes were taken during the work session. Staff said they will refine project estimates, pursue clarifications about grant splits and sequencing, and provide updated schedules and notes back to the council (staff identified Nathan as the person who could circulate a follow‑up note). Several participants asked for paper copies of the worksheets and additional line‑item breakdowns to facilitate review.

Where the discussion left off

Participants urged conservative assumptions while the staff update is completed. The session closed without policy decisions or new borrowing approvals; staff will return with updated numbers and more detailed cost breaks for subgrade and utility work before any final commitments are made by the council.