Project Red Team - reviewer pack
Location Decision Reviewer Pack
Klamath Midpoint leads this comparison on the evidence in the pack. The ranking has not been shown to hold, so it is a provisional leader and not yet a site recommendation. It leads Bend South by 0.0375 on the 0-to-1 weighted scale this pack ranks on, where 1 is the best any candidate achieved on a component and 0 the worst. Confidence: a thin margin over the runner-up. Conditions: Run parcel-level utilities and wetland screen before acquisition.
Decision Rule
Candidates are grouped by status first, so a candidate that could not be evaluated ranks below one that could, whatever its score. Within a status, they are ordered by expected regret, which is the leader's weighted score minus the candidate's — so ordering by the lowest expected regret and by the highest weighted score give the same ranking. The stated qualifying weighted score is above 0 on a 0-to-1 scale, which excludes nothing that was scored. No candidate here was ruled out by it.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Metric | Weighted score |
| Direction | above |
| Threshold | 0 |
| Rank by | Expected regret |
| Phase aggregation | Steady state annual |
Candidate Ranking
| Rank | Candidate | Status | Score | Conditions | Blockers | Warnings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Klamath Midpoint | evaluated | 0.7180 | Run parcel-level utilities and wetland screen before acquisition. | ||
| 2 | Bend South | evaluated | 0.6805 | Test whether higher local capture is displacement rather than new demand. | ||
| 3 | Weed Gateway | evaluated | 0.5350 | Confirm California entitlement path before public release. |
Candidate Score Components
On the components these two share, Net new capture puts Klamath Midpoint 0.0600 ahead of Bend South and Entitlement readiness a further 0.0300; Regional access puts it 0.0425 behind and Fiscal readiness a further 0.0100. The Regional access gap on its own is wider than the 0.0375 margin, so the lead holds only because the differences running the other way are larger together. Those differences are the whole margin: the two candidates are scored on the same components and on nothing else. The Consequence column below reads each component on its own rather than against the runner-up, so a component it describes as increasing rank can still be one this candidate trails on.
Klamath Midpoint
| Component | Value | Unit | Score (0-1, higher is better) | Weight (share of the total, sums to 1) | Tier | Source | Consequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regional access | 0.75 | score | 0.75 | 0.25 | declared | demo corridor screen | increases rank because it reaches both north and south demand pools |
| Net new capture | 0.7 | share | 0.7 | 0.3 | declared | demo trade-area screen | increases rank because capture is less purely local displacement |
| Fiscal readiness | 0.69 | score | 0.69 | 0.2 | declared | demo fiscal screen | supports rank because tax and service geography is legible |
| Entitlement readiness | 0.73 | score | 0.73 | 0.25 | declared | demo regulatory screen | supports rank subject to parcel-level confirmation |
Score rates this component for this candidate on a 0-to-1 scale where 1 is the best any candidate achieved and 0 the worst; it is a ranking aid calibrated against the other candidates in this comparison and against nothing outside it. Weight is that component's share of the total, and the weights sum to 1.
Bend South
| Component | Value | Unit | Score (0-1, higher is better) | Weight (share of the total, sums to 1) | Tier | Source | Consequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regional access | 0.92 | score | 0.92 | 0.25 | declared | demo corridor screen | increases rank because the largest demand pool is nearby |
| Net new capture | 0.5 | share | 0.5 | 0.3 | declared | demo trade-area screen | reduces rank because more spending is likely local displacement |
| Fiscal readiness | 0.74 | score | 0.74 | 0.2 | declared | demo fiscal screen | supports rank because service and tax geography is mature |
| Entitlement readiness | 0.61 | score | 0.61 | 0.25 | declared | demo regulatory screen | keeps rank conditional because local compatibility must be proven |
Score rates this component for this candidate on a 0-to-1 scale where 1 is the best any candidate achieved and 0 the worst; it is a ranking aid calibrated against the other candidates in this comparison and against nothing outside it. Weight is that component's share of the total, and the weights sum to 1.
Weed Gateway
| Component | Value | Unit | Score (0-1, higher is better) | Weight (share of the total, sums to 1) | Tier | Source | Consequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regional access | 0.58 | score | 0.58 | 0.25 | declared | demo corridor screen | reduces rank because the northern Oregon demand pool is farther away |
| Net new capture | 0.62 | share | 0.62 | 0.3 | declared | demo trade-area screen | supports rank because more spend is modeled as new to the region |
| Fiscal readiness | 0.52 | score | 0.52 | 0.2 | declared | demo fiscal screen | penalizes rank pending jurisdiction-specific revenue sharing |
| Entitlement readiness | 0.4 | score | 0.4 | 0.25 | declared | demo regulatory screen | penalizes rank because approval pathway is least developed |
Score rates this component for this candidate on a 0-to-1 scale where 1 is the best any candidate achieved and 0 the worst; it is a ranking aid calibrated against the other candidates in this comparison and against nothing outside it. Weight is that component's share of the total, and the weights sum to 1.
Sensitivity
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Rank stability | Not established |
| Rank stability measurement | None recorded |
| Win probability | None recorded |
| Pairwise regret | Klamath Midpoint: 0.0000; Bend South: 0.0375; Weed Gateway: 0.1830 |
| Flip conditions | A small movement in weighted components could move Bend South ahead of Klamath Midpoint; run correlated propagation before making this a final siting recommendation. |
Not Established
- Correlated candidate propagation has not been run; ranking is a deterministic comparison of the supplied or solved components.
- The ranking of these candidates is not established. It has not been resampled, so the order it reports is one deterministic run and the flip conditions state what would move it.
- No win probability is established. Nothing in this run estimates how often each candidate would come first if the inputs were resampled.
- No candidate's score is an economic figure for the jurisdiction it sits in. The score is a weighted reading of site evidence, calibrated against the other candidates in this pack and against nothing outside it, and no multiplier of any kind stands behind it. A county named here is where a site is, not a place this pack has measured.
What Due Diligence Comes Next
These are the steps this pack records, and it records no others: what the engine was told about each site, and the work the ranking itself is waiting on. The pack does not scope a diligence program and nothing here is a substitute for one. Bend South's conditions are here beside Klamath Midpoint's because the ranking is not established and 0.0375 on the same 0-to-1 scale separates them, so neither site has been ruled out.
- Establish rank stability. The order in this pack is one deterministic run and has not been resampled, and that run is what stands between a provisional leader and a site recommendation.
- Klamath Midpoint: Run parcel-level utilities and wetland screen before acquisition.
- Bend South: Test whether higher local capture is displacement rather than new demand.
- Weed Gateway: Confirm California entitlement path before public release.
Diagnostics
No diagnostics to show.
Validation
| Severity | Check | Message | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Note | Location decision | passed | None recorded |