The Capital Planning and Investment Committee finalized last Thursday the ratings sheet that will be used to decide among the remaining capital requests for fiscal year 2013. The committee has already made two rounds of cuts, but most of the original submissions still remain.

The total for requests still being considered is $3,148,199. The bulk of that money is the $2,262,000 submitted by the Municipal Buildings Committee for the renovation of Town Hall and the Hildreth House. Of the remaining amount, $250,000 of the capital requests are for the Harvard schools. Other large-ticket items include $250,000 for road repairs and $165,000 for a boom flail mower, from the Department of Public Works.

Members of the committee will individually rate each project and then further discuss them at upcoming meetings.

The current ratings sheet is based on one developed by committee member Debbie Ricci last year to guide her own decision-making. This year's version is modified with a sliding scale.

The rating sheet is focused largely on cost. The categories on the ratings sheet are justification of need, whether the requested amount is reasonable and the project cost has been substantiated, the expected useful life of the project, whether the capital costs will be offset with other funding, the extent to which the project can be deferred to later years without detrimental effects, and the impact on the town's operating budget.

Within most categories, points are awarded on a sliding scale. For example, if the capital request is for a project that is legally mandated or designed to protect the safety of the public, it earns five points. If the project is proposed because it will lead to cost savings, it can earn up to three points. If the project has an expected useful life of 20 years or more, it earns three points. Life expectancy of 10 to 19 years earns only two points.

If the project cannot be entirely justified on the basis of need, one point is awarded for each of the following: "a significant portion of the project can be justified on the basis of need;" the project is both inexpensive and won't cost the town money in future years; it has little risk of cost overruns; it "furthers a recognized Town priority;" and "the proposed expenditure bears a reasonable relationship to the value of the project to the town."

Members of Capital Planning and Investment Committee were rating the projects this week and were scheduled to begin deliberations on Thursday, Feb. 2.