Performance Measurement Report & SMART Goals 2020PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
& SMART GOALS
CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 1, 2020
In an effort to better measure and continually improve overall levels of service and quality of
life, the city of New Hope developed the Performance Measurement Report and SMART goals
document. The Performance Measurement Report compares top tier indicators, which capture
the state of the city, while SMART goals track Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and
Timely objectives set forth by department heads.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW & HISTORY............................................................................................................................3
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT............................................................................................4
COMMUNITY SAFETY & SECURITY.............................................................................................................5
PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY & COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY...............................................................10
GENERAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION....................................................................14
ATTRACTIVE, HIGH QUALITY NEIGHBORHOODS & BUSINESS DISTRICTS .........................................20
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT.................................................................24
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO SIMILAR CITIES.........................................................................................26
SMART GOALS.......................................................................................................................................27
GENERAL FUND.........................................................................................................................................28
PUBLIC SAFETY ..........................................................................................................................................31
STREETS......................................................................................................................................................35
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND..........................................................................................................................36
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND.........................................................................................................................37
ENTERPRISE FUNDS...................................................................................................................................38
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS.......................................................................................................................40
PAGE 2
OVERVIEW & HISTORY
CITY OF NEW HOPE OVERVIEW & HISTORY
LOCATION
The city of New Hope is a suburb located northwest
of Minneapolis with strong neighborhoods, an
abundance of parks and recreational opportunities,
excellent schools, and great shopping nearby. The
city has easy access to the entire Twin Cities area
with major arterials of Highway 169, Highway 100,
Interstate 694, and Interstate 394 all nearby.
POPULATION (2010 CENSUS)SIZE/AREA YEAR FORMED
20,339 5.1 square miles 1953
BUSINESSES JOBS SHOPPING CENTERS
480 11,080 5
SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOLS PARKS/ACREAGE
Robbinsdale Area (281)5 18/200
HISTORY
In the early 1900s, New Hope was a farming-rich
community. The area was settled as part of Crystal
Lake Township and became the home for many
family farms. As housing developments spread west
from Minneapolis in the 1930s, the residents of Crystal Lake Township began the movement to
incorporate the township. In 1936, the city of Crystal was incorporated. Forming a city, though,
was not supported by all residents in the township. The rural residents in the western half of
the township broke away from the city of Crystal and formed their own township. The resistant
residents, mostly farmers, were unhappy about paying taxes for projects such as street lighting
and sanitary sewer. The name the farmers selected for their new township was a reflection of
the time, New Hope.
Many residents along the New Hope-Crystal border formed groups and requested to be
annexed by Crystal in order to receive what were the most modern city services at the time.
Others, however, were happy to be part of New Hope township and remained separate from
Crystal. Therefore, pockets of New Hope residents were created along the eastern boundary.
By the early 1950s, the rapidly developing township of New Hope chose the fate it had eluded
just over 15 years earlier. In 1953, New Hope incorporated as a city to prevent losing more of
its land and residents to Crystal via annexation. This move was again opposed by the farming
community of New Hope, but housing developments between 1936 and 1953 had made farmers
a minority in New Hope.
When the township was incorporated, it had 600 residents. The city grew rapidly and was home
to over 2,500 people by 1958. This rapid population growth continued through the 1960s, and by
1971, there were 24,000 residents in New Hope. The population of the community has declined
slightly since 1971.
PAGE 3
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
The city of New Hope Performance Measurement Report is a cumulative summary report
compiled from various sources, primarily the City Services Survey, an annual paper and
web-based survey, and the Morris Leatherman Company Survey, an extensive professional
community-wide phone survey. SMART goals that appear within the report are denoted with a
light bulb symbol (💡).
CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 1, 2020
COMPARISON OF TOP TIER INDICATORS
COMMUNITY SAFETY & SECURITY
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
1. SAFETY (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Very or somewhat safe1/Excellent or good2 91%93%91%92%93%
Somewhat or very unsafe1/Fair or poor2 9%7%8%7%7%
Unknown/Blank1,2 1%1%2%1%1%
PAGE 5
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 91%86%98%85%N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 9%13%2%15%N/A
Unknown 1%1%1%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 93%77%N/A N/A N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 7%21%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1%1%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 91%82%N/A 86%N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 8%18%N/A 14%N/A
Unknown 2%0%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 92%84%N/A N/A N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 7%16%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1%0%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 93%82%N/A N/A N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 7%18%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1%0%N/A N/A N/A
1 Data for citizens’ rating of safety in the community from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an annual
paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s
Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of quality of service for police protection from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman
Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
2. CRIME RATE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Part I crimes 548 583 581 682 611
Part II crimes 1,188 814 628 721 680
Crime rate data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s police department. Part I crimes include murder, rape, aggravated
assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Part II crimes include other assaults, forgery/counterfeiting,
embezzlement, stolen property, vandalism, weapons, prostitutions, other sex offenses, narcotics, gambling, family/children
crime, DUI, liquor laws, and disorderly conduct.
PAGE 6
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crimes 548 563 515 516 995
Part II crimes 1,188 996 651 574 1,100
Comparison data was compiled from reports posted on official city websites or requested and supplied directly by city staff.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crimes 583 518 515 545 997
Part II crimes 814 925 571 628 1,283
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crimes 581 613 508 624 1,007
Part II crimes 628 847 753 628 1,289
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crimes 682 551 456 591 868
Part II crimes 721 786 623 556 1,332
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crimes 611 666 490 473 864
Part II crimes 680 753 538 538 1,143
3. TRAFFIC ACCIDENT RATE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Accidents 410 428 422 411 432
Accidents per 1,000 population 20.16 21.04 20.75 20.21 21.24
Traffic accident data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s police department.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 7
2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Accidents per 1,000 population 20.16 12.82 16.64 13.28 24.58
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Accidents per 1,000 population 21.04 12.91 16.82 14.82 24.16
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Accidents per 1,000 population 20.75 16.67 20.14 12.72 24.89
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Accidents per 1,000 population 20.21 17.65 16.95 15.38 25.52
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Accidents per 1,000 population 21.24 15.08 15.52 17.67 27.88
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the Performance
Measurement Program or requested and supplied directly by city staff.
4. POLICE RESPONSE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes)4.36 4.34 4.32 4.36 4.35
Traffic accident data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s police department.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes)4.36 N/A N/A N/A 4.49
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes)4.34 N/A N/A N/A 3.71
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes)4.32 N/A N/A N/A 3.69
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes)4.36 N/A N/A N/A 4.04
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes)4.35 N/A 2.23 4.02 4.02
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the Performance
Measurement Program or requested and supplied directly by city staff.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
5. EMERGENCY SERVICES
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Calls for service 758 795 979 972 1,097
Calls per 1,000 population 37.27 39.09 48.13 47.79 53.94
Emergency services data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the West Metro Fire-Rescue District. Calls for service include fire,
hazardous conditions, target hazards, EMS, rescue, weather, police assistance, service, good intent, and false alarms, amongst
others.
PAGE 8
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 37.27 34.13 34.34 13.70 114.31
Comparison data was compiled from reports posted on official city websites or requested and supplied directly by city staff.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 39.09 31.46 36.67 14.45 114.31
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 48.13 39.64 31.38 14.40 121.52
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 47.79 36.93 29.23 13.70 118.23
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 53.94 37.88 36.03 17.80 125.21
6. CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 69%45%N/A N/A N/A
Fair 11%16%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%9%N/A N/A N/A
Too tough N/A N/A 7%7%7%
About right N/A N/A 47%53%58%
Not tough enough N/A N/A 36%34%34%
Unknown/Blank 20%30%10%6%1%
2 Data for citizens’ rating of quality of code enforcement services from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman
Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of code enforcement services from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services
Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in
the state’s Performance Measurement Program. Potential responses to the survey were changed in 2017 to better correlate
with how the survey question was worded. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
7. FIRE PROTECTION (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 92%68%67%79%80%
Fair or neutral 5%2%2%17%18%
Poor 0%0%0%1%1%
Unknown or blank 3%30%31%4%2%
PAGE 9
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of fire protection services from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey,
an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s
Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of quality of service for fire protection from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company
Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 92%63%94%97%N/A
Fair or neutral 5%7%1%3%N/A
Poor 0%1%0%0%N/A
Unknown or blank 3%29%5%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 68%61%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 2%10%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 0%2%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 30%27%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 67%66%N/A 97%N/A
Fair or neutral 2%4%N/A 3%N/A
Poor 0%1%N/A 0%N/A
Unknown or blank 31%29%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 79%71%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 17%3%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%0%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 4%26%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 80%73%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 18%3%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%1%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 2%23%N/A N/A N/A
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
8. CITY SERVICES/QUALITY OF LIFE (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 98%87%84.5%81%81%
Fair or neutral 2%10%10.5%16%17%
Poor 0%1%1%1%1%
Unknown or blank 0%3%4%2%1%
PAGE 10
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the overall quality of city services from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an
annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s
Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of quality of life from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a professional
community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 98%72%98%90%N/A
Fair or neutral 2%18%2%10%N/A
Poor 0%6%0%0%N/A
Unknown or blank 0%4%0%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 87%62%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 10%27%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%8%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 3%3%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 84.5%78%N/A 91%N/A
Fair or neutral 10.5%14%N/A 9%N/A
Poor 1%4%N/A 0%N/A
Unknown or blank 4%4%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 81%76%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 16%15%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%4%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 2%5%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 81%73%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 17%17%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%5%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%5%N/A N/A N/A
PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY & COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
9. CREDITWORTHINESS
PAGE 11
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Bond rating 💡AA AA AA AA AA
The city’s bond rating for 2015-2019 was determined by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services. Standard & Poor’s rating definitions
state that “an issuer rated ‘AA’ has very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments and differs from the highest-rated
issuers only to a small degree.” The rating reflects an assessment of various factors for the city, including strong economy (an
improvement from 2016); very strong management with “strong” financial policies; strong budgetary performance, with an
operating surplus in the general fund; very strong budgetary flexibility; very strong liquidity; weak debt and contingent liability
profile; and a strong institutional framework score.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA AA+
Comparison data was compiled from reports posted on official websites for each city. The AAA rating represents minimum
credit risk and signifies that the insurer has extremely strong capacity to meet its financial commitments. It is the highest rating
assigned by Moody’s Investors Service and Standard & Poor’s. Moody’s AA1 rating and Standard & Poor’s AA+ rating are the
second highest ratings assigned by each agency and indicate a slightly higher rating as compared to Standard & Poor’s AA rating
and Moody’s AA2 rating.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA AA+
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA AA+
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA AA+
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA+AA+
10. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Unqualified audit on financial statements 💡
Unqualified financial audits for 2015-2019 were performed by Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A.
11. FINANCIAL CONDITION
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Property taxes (general fund)$8,308,447 $8,954,626 $9,541,667 $9,971,064 $10,297,018
Personnel costs (general fund)$7,409,500 $7,429,564 $7,771,859 $8,156,899 $8,634,285
Ratio of tax revenues to personnel costs 1.12 1.21 1.23 1.22 1.19
Property tax payment rate 99.73%99.48%99.40%99.40%99.15%
Financial condition data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s financial consultant, Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, as a part of
the city’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
💡SMART Goal
💡SMART Goal
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 12
12. PROPERTY VALUES
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Taxable market value 💡$1,430,939,117 $1,535,054,114 $1,697,092,365 $1,831,436,951 $2,021,382,123
Percent change in taxable market value 7.23%7.28%10.56%7.92%10.37%
Data for taxable market values of properties in New Hope for 2015-2019 was determined by Hennepin County. Taxable market
value for 2015 was payable in 2016, value for 2016 was payable in 2017, etc.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,430,939,117 $1,339,237,404 $3,097,563,064 $1,927,158,300 $2,670,879,248
Percent change in taxable market value 7.23%3.52%5.56%4.80%5.08%
Data for taxable market values was compiled from comprehensive market value reports posted on Hennepin County’s website.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,535,054,114 $1,482,067,331 $3,271,878,353 $2,058,438,500 $2,897,764,130
Percent change in taxable market value 7.28%10.67%5.63%6.81%8.49%
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,697,092,365 $1,637,892,494 $3,523,108,955 $2,233,653,900 $3,079,159,709
Percent change in taxable market value 10.56%10.51%7.68%8.51%6.26%
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,831,436,951 $1,780,685,897 $3,842,319,483 $2,417,354,100 $3,421,012,095
Percent change in taxable market value 7.92%8.72%9.06%8.22%11.1%
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $2,021,382,123 $1,995,358,954 $4,136,243,370 $2,568,417,900 $3,688,345,783
Percent change in taxable market value 10.37%12.06%7.65%6.25%7.81%
13. EMPLOYEE RETENTION
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Turnover rate 💡10.4%10.7%9.4%6.5%5.4%
Employee turnover rate data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s human resources department.
💡SMART Goal
💡SMART Goal
14. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Number of insurance claims 26 28 20 41 19
Experience modification rate 💡1.30 1.30 1.40 1.08 1.05
Insurance claims and Experience Modification Rate (EMR) data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s human resources
department. The EMR gauges the past cost of injuries and future chances of risk, impacting the cost of the city’s worker
compensation insurance premiums. The industry benchmark average EMR is 1.0. An EMR of less than 1.0 effectively reduces
the premium paid, where an EMR greater than 1.0 increases the premium paid. The EMR for 2019-2020 is calculated using 2015,
2016, and 2017 data.
💡SMART Goal
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 13
15. ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
The Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program is a voluntary challenge, assistance, and recognition program that helps cities
achieve their sustainability and quality-of-life goals. This free continuous improvement program, managed by a public-private
partnership, is based upon 29 best practices comprised of 175 best practice actions. The program recognizes cities for their
accomplishments by assigning a step level ranging from 1 to 5, which is determined by Minnesota GreenStep Cities.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES
Comparison data was compiled from the Minnesota GreenStep Cities’ website. “N/A” signifies that the city had not yet joined
the program.
2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Minnesota GreenStep Cities rating Step 2 Step 2 N/A N/A Step 1
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Minnesota GreenStep Cities rating Step 3 Step 2 Step 1 Step 2 Step 2
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Minnesota GreenStep Cities rating Step 3 Step 2 Step 2 Step 2 Step 2
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Minnesota GreenStep Cities rating Step 3 Step 3 Step 4 Step 4 Step 3
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Minnesota GreenStep Cities step level Step 2 Step 3 Step 3 Step 3 Step 3
Best practices completed 15 18 21 24 24
Best practice actions completed 💡65 70 76 83 88
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Minnesota GreenStep Cities rating Step 3 Step 2 Step 3 Step 3 Step 2
💡SMART Goal
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
16. CITY ROADS (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 70%63%76%70%62%
Fair or neutral 22%30%20%23%31%
Poor 9%6%4%2%6%
Unknown or blank 0%1%0%5%1%
PAGE 14
1 Data for citizens’ rating of city roads from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an annual paper and
web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance
Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of pavement repair and patching from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company
Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 70%70%84%62%N/A
Fair or neutral 22%23%10%29%N/A
Poor 9%6%7%9%N/A
Unknown or blank 0%1%0%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 63%63%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 30%25%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 6%12%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%0%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 76%75%N/A 63%N/A
Fair or neutral 20%19%N/A 30%N/A
Poor 4%5%N/A 7%N/A
Unknown or blank 0%0%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 70%73%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 23%23%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 2%4%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 5%0%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 62%70%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 31%23%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 6%7%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%0%N/A N/A N/A
GENERAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
17. PAVEMENT
PAGE 15
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Pavement condition rating 💡73 (good)75 (good)76 (good)76 (good)76 (good)
Data for pavement condition ratings from 2015-2019 was compiled by the city engineer.
18. ROAD SNOWPLOWING (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 88%84%84%80%78%
Fair or neutral 12%10%12%15%18%
Poor 1%4%2%4%4%
Unknown or blank 0%2%2%1%0%
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of snowplowing of city streets from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey,
an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s
Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of snowplowing of city streets from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman
Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 88%67%98%75%N/A
Fair or neutral 12%18%2%19%N/A
Poor 1%14%0%6%N/A
Unknown or blank 0%2%0%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 84%43%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 10%35%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 4%17%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 2%6%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 84%69%N/A 81%N/A
Fair or neutral 12%19%N/A 12%N/A
Poor 2%9%N/A 7%N/A
Unknown or blank 2%3%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 80%63%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 15%23%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 4%11%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%3%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 78%65%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 18%21%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 4%13%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 0%1%N/A N/A N/A
💡SMART Goal
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 16
19. WATER UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Water main breaks 20 19 12 24 14
Water main break data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s public works department.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Water main breaks 20 9 27 11 30
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
requested and supplied directly by city staff.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Water main breaks 19 9 14 28 16
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Water main breaks 12 13 11 14 11
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Water main breaks 24 12 17 21 12
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Water main breaks 14 10 14 15 10
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 17
20. WATER QUALITY (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 81%88%90%86%87%
Fair or neutral 18%7%6%12%11%
Poor 1%2%2%1%1%
Unknown or blank 1%3%2%1%1%
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the dependability and quality of the city water supply from 2016-2019 was compiled from the
City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s
participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of the taste and quality of drinking water from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman
Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 81%81%96%69%N/A
Fair or neutral 18%13%3%19%N/A
Poor 1%3%1%11%N/A
Unknown or blank 1%3%0%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey
or Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported. The cities of New Hope, Crystal, and
Golden Valley are members of the Joint Water Commission (JWC), a joint powers board that was formed in 1963 with the intent
of providing its member cities with a secure, reliable, cost-effective water supply. The JWC purchases water from the city of
Minneapolis, which draws its water supply from the Mississippi River in Fridley, where it is treated and purified.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 88%85%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 7%9%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 2%1%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 3%5%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 90%89%N/A 53%N/A
Fair or neutral 6%6%N/A 29%N/A
Poor 2%3%N/A 18%N/A
Unknown or blank 2%2%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 86%91%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 12%6%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%2%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%1%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 87%87%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 11%9%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%2%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%2%N/A N/A N/A
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 18
21. SANITARY SEWER (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 82%84%86%80%81%
Fair or neutral 8%6%5%16%17%
Poor 1%1%1%1%1%
Unknown or blank 9%10%8%3%1%
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the dependability and quality of the city sanitary sewer service from 2016-2019 was compiled from
the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s
participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of the sanitary sewer service from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a
professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 82%77%100%86%N/A
Fair or neutral 8%9%0%13%N/A
Poor 1%1%0%1%N/A
Unknown or blank 9%13%0%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 84%70%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 6%11%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%7%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 10%12%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 86%82%N/A 77%N/A
Fair or neutral 5%6%N/A 20%N/A
Poor 1%0%N/A 3%N/A
Unknown or blank 8%12%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 80%84%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 16%5%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%1%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 3%10%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 81%80%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 17%6%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%2%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%11%N/A N/A N/A
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 19
23. EASE OF GETTING PLACE TO PLACE (CITIZEN RATING)
2 Data for citizens’ rating of the ease of getting place to place from 2016-2017 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an
annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s
Performance Measurement Program. The question was removed from the 2018 and 2019 surveys.
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the ease of getting place to place from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company
Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
22. SEWER UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Blockages 0 0 0 0 1
Blockages per 1,000 connections (5,400 total).000 .000 .000 .000 .185
Sewer blockages data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s public works department.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .000 .625 .134 .000 .000
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the Performance
Measurement Program or requested and supplied directly by city staff.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .000 1.000 .000 .000 .278
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .000 1.000 .267 .169 .000
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .000 1.000 .401 .674 .000
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .185 .375 .267 .169 .000
20151 20162 20172 2018 2019
Excellent or good 91%89%90%N/A N/A
Fair 7%10%8%N/A N/A
Poor 1%1%1%N/A N/A
Unknown 1%1%1%N/A N/A
ATTRACTIVE, HIGH QUALITY NEIGHBORHOODS & BUSINESS
DISTRICTS
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
24. DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Permits issued 2,169 2,607 2,652 2,441 2,459
Fees collected 💡$512,461 $602,391 $867,289 $506,883 $452,267
Valuation of work 💡$33,976,062 $37,740,765 $71,895,249 $46,952,876 $38,288,981
PAGE 20
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits issued 2,169 2,883 4,813 2,527 5,918
Fees collected $512,461 $390,165 $1,763,474 $987,518 $708,047
Valuation of work $33,976,062 $10,182,327 $124,962,804 $44,930,313 $33,286,214
Comparison data was requested and supplied directly by city staff.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits issued 2,607 2,757 4,814 2,586 4,993
Fees collected $602,391 $386,630 $1,748,614 $881,527 $973,395
Valuation of work $37,740,765 $11,466,999 $107,882,740 $29,340,095 $75,795,522
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits issued 2,652 2,808 5,018 2,335 5,185
Fees collected $867,289 $432,094 $3,096,517 $941,559 $902,259
Valuation of work $71,895,249 $17,035,179 $277,026,108 $41,167,266 $116,226,763
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits issued 2,441 2,562 4,811 2,087 5,384
Fees collected $506,883 $447,303 $1,799,287 $469,215 $1,326,046
Valuation of work $46,952,876 $13,912,369 $99,559,332 $17,164,550 $189,452,625
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits issued 2,459 2,833 4,842 2,215 4,971
Fees collected $452,267 $477,399 $1,633,897 $1,425,085 $2,336,391
Valuation of work $38,288,981 $26,654,088 $88,065,061 $85,540,662 $242,383,630
Permit data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s community development department.
💡SMART Goal
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 21
25. RECREATION PROGRAMS & FACILITIES (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 85%74%73%75%74%
Fair or neutral 5%10%8%22%24%
Poor 1%1%2%1%1%
Unknown or blank 10%16%17%2%1%
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of city recreational programs and facilities from 2016-2019 was compiled from the
City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s
participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of recreation facilities from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a
professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley1 New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 85%70%93%/97%67%N/A
Fair or neutral 5%15%0%29%N/A
Poor 1%11%0%3%N/A
Unknown or blank 10%4%7%/3%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 74%61%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 10%19%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%14%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 16%7%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 73%71%N/A 70%N/A
Fair or neutral 8%19%N/A 26%N/A
Poor 2%5%N/A 4%N/A
Unknown or blank 17%6%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 75%72%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 22%17%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%5%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 2%6%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 74%71%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 24%15%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%6%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%8%N/A N/A N/A
1 Survey separated questions for recreation programs and recreation facilities.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
26. RECREATION PARTICIPATION & ATTENDANCE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Participants in recreation programs 💡25,257 23,717 25,043 25,604 23,598
Pool attendance 17,210 19,755 18,761 Closed Closed
Pool passes 591 665 657 Closed Closed
Golf rounds 💡18,175 20,375 18,662 17,800 16,837
Open skating attendance 💡1,646 1,728 1,962 2,204 2,594
Ice hours rented 💡3,682 3,567 4,030 4,151 4,202
PAGE 22
Recreation program participant data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s parks and recreation department.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley1 New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 17,210 28,092 N/A N/A N/A
Pool passes 591 759 (family)N/A N/A N/A
Golf rounds 18,175 N/A 17,037 22,136 N/A
Open skating attendance 1,646 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Ice hours rented 3,682 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Comparison data was requested and supplied directly by city staff. “N/A” signifies that the city does not operate a pool.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley1 New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 19,755 26,769 N/A N/A 46,615
Pool passes 665 812 (family)N/A N/A N/A
Golf rounds 20,375 N/A 16,364 22,072 N/A
Open skating attendance 1,728 N/A N/A N/A 3,423
Ice hours rented 3,567 N/A N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley1 New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 18,761 27,098 N/A N/A 36,288
Pool passes 657 626 (family)N/A N/A 1,856
Golf rounds 18,662 N/A 15,556 19,675 N/A
Open skating attendance 1,962 N/A N/A N/A 4,796
Ice hours rented 4,030 N/A N/A N/A N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley1 New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance Closed 30,350 N/A N/A 42,480
Pool passes Closed 2,276 (ind.)N/A N/A 1,840
Golf rounds 17,800 N/A 15,723 18,128 N/A
Open skating attendance 2,204 N/A N/A N/A 4,673
Ice hours rented 4,151 N/A N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley1 New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance Closed 26,631 N/A N/A 43,560
Pool passes Closed 2,024 (ind.)N/A N/A 1,961
Golf rounds 16,837 N/A 16,430 16,893 N/A
Open skating attendance 2,594 N/A N/A N/A 4,448
Ice hours rented 4,202 N/A N/A N/A 5,702
💡SMART Goal
1 Data from par 3 golf course only, does not include rounds at 18-hole regulation course.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 23
27. CITY/NEIGHBORHOOD APPEARANCE (CITIZEN RATING)
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 94%78%82%79%79%
Fair or neutral 5%20%15%20%19%
Poor 1%2%2%1%1%
Unknown or blank 0%0%1%0%1%
1 Data for citizens’ rating of the overall appearance of the city from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an
annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s
Performance Measurement Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of the overall general appearance of their neighborhood from 2015 was compiled from the Morris
Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 94%55%97%78%N/A
Fair or neutral 5%37%3%20%N/A
Poor 1%6%1%2%N/A
Unknown or blank 0%2%0%0%N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey or
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 78%50%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 20%43%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 2%7%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 0%0%N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 82%69%N/A 82%N/A
Fair or neutral 15%26%N/A 19%N/A
Poor 2%4%N/A 1%N/A
Unknown or blank 1%0%N/A 0%N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 79%63%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 20%31%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%6%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 0%0%N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 79%65%N/A N/A N/A
Fair or neutral 19%30%N/A N/A N/A
Poor 1%5%N/A N/A N/A
Unknown or blank 1%0%N/A N/A N/A
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
28. DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION (CITIZEN RATING)
PAGE 24
1 Data for citizens’ rating of overall performance in communicating key local issues to residents in its publications, website,
mailings, and on cable television from 2016-2019 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based
survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement
Program.
2 Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of communication/distribution of information from 2015 was compiled from the Morris
Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
29. WEBSITE TRAFFIC
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Unique visitors 114,357 115,356 98,049 91,165 102,583
Website data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s communications department.
20152 20161 20171 20181 20191
Excellent or good 86%78%77%77%72%
Fair or neutral 13%16%19%20%24%
Poor 1%1%2%3%3%
Unknown or blank 1%5%2%1%1%
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Unique visitors 114,357 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Comparison data was requested and supplied directly by city staff.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Unique visitors 115,356 98,839 N/A N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Unique visitors 98,049 90,037 N/A N/A N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Unique visitors 91,165 91,105 N/A N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Unique visitors 102,583 96,539 N/A N/A N/A
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 25
30. MEETING VIEWERSHIP
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Online views of city meetings 3,013 1,197 1,429 803 555
Online viewership data for 2015-2019 was compiled by CCX Media, the organization that broadcasts city meetings. Viewership
numbers include city council, economic development authority, and planning commission meetings as well as candidate
forums and state of the city events. A technical problem prevented Northwest Community Television from gathering data from
November and December 2018, therefore viewership data for those two months is not included in the total.
COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES 2015
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Online views of city meetings 3,013 1,501 2,566 N/A N/A
Comparison data was requested and supplied directly by CCX Media.
2016
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Online views of city meetings 1,119 1,184 1,234 N/A N/A
2017
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Online views of city meetings 1,429 1,220 1,169 N/A N/A
2018
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Online views of city meetings 803 584 1,016 N/A N/A
2019
New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Online views of city meetings 555 503 1,509 N/A N/A
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO SIMILAR CITIES
31. TAX RATE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
New Hope1 55.98%57.41%59.93%58.59%67.99%
New Hope without street infrastructure levy2 47.42%48.57%51.43%50.29%59.23%
Crystal 50.50%53.21%50.36%50.42%48.77%
Golden Valley 54.63%54.45%56.11%55.15%53.78%
Champlin 42.71%44.28%43.00%41.19%39.61%
Hopkins 62.50%65.58%64.49%67.83%71.70%
Brooklyn Center 71.29%73.29%71.90%68.43%71.86%
Tax rate data for 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s financial consultant, Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, from the county rate
cards.
1 New Hope’s total tax capacity rate does not take into account that New Hope does not levy special assessments for street
infrastructure improvement projects.
2 Removing New Hope’s street infrastructure levy from the tax capacity rate puts it on an equal playing field with neighboring
communities. The city funds street infrastructure improvement projects through its annual street infrastructure levy with the
cost of street improvements spread across all taxpaying properties.
32. DEBT PER CAPITA
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
New Hope 957 1,160 2,040 2,448 2,605
Crystal 666 696 884 760 668
Golden Valley 3,424 2,965 4,134 2,808 3,938
Champlin 417 404 184 164 143
Hopkins 2,320 2,812 3,518 3,797 4,055
Brooklyn Center 1,103 1,663 1,757 1,921 1,954
Debt per capita data for New Hope from 2015-2019 was compiled by the city’s financial consultant, Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP,
as a part of the city’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
33. RESPONSE RATE
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
New Hope 400 646 632 679 610
Crystal 179 89 530 362 399
Golden Valley 400 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Richfield N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
New Brighton 370 N/A 330 N/A N/A
All comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the City Services Survey,
with the exception of New Hope and Golden Valley in 2015. Data for New Hope and Golden Valley in 2015 was compiled from the
Morris Leatherman Company Survey. “N/A” signifies that no survey was conducted.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
PAGE 26
SMART GOALS
The city developed SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Timely) goals in 2016
based on sections of the annual budget. The objective of a SMART goal is to tell exactly what is
expected, why it is important, who is involved, when it is going to happen, and which attributes
are important. Such goals have a much greater chance of being accomplished as compared to
general goals.
CITY OF NEW HOPE, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 1, 2020
ESTABLISHED BETWEEN 2016 & 2019
GENERAL FUND
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
CITY MANAGER
Goal: Coordinate with department heads to ensure an average of $500,000 per year in grants or
outside funding sources for city programs over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$647,126 $280,597 $2,266,459 $505,403 TBD
Status: On track. The city received 24 grants for $647,126 in 2016, 26 grants for $280,597 in 2017, 32
grants for $2,266,459 in 2018, and 31 grants for $505,403 in 2019, for an average of $924,896
received per year. In 2017, no large infrastructure/capital improvement projects qualified for
significant grant funding. In 2018, the Minnesota legislature approved a request by the city for $2
million to help pay for a new 50-meter outdoor pool.
PAGE 28
Goal: Complete or improve star rating for three or more best practices through the Minnesota
GreenStep Cities program in 2019.
Status: Completed. The city completed five new best practice actions and increased its star rating for an
additional three best practice actions between 2018 and 2019.
2018 2019
83 88
FINANCE
Goal: Increase bond rating from AA to AA+ in the next five years.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
AA AA AA AA AA TBD
Status: In progress. The city’s bonds are rated by Standard and Poor’s (S&P) and remained stable at “AA”
in 2019, signifying that the city has very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments and is
just two rankings below the highest-rated AAA issuers. The city’s financial consultant developed
and implemented a Comprehensive Financial Management Plan in 2016. The plan includes a debt
management plan, revenue management, capital assets, and an update to the investment policy.
City staff also published an economic development report, which was submitted with the financial
management plan in an effort to increase the city’s bond rating. In 2017, S&P recognized these
efforts by improving the city’s “Management” score from “Strong” to “Very Strong,” which is the
highest value assigned by S&P for this portion of the rating, but the overall rating did not change.
According to S&P, if the city’s economic indicators improve to a level commensurate with higher
rated peers and the debt profile improves, a higher rating is possible. The economic indicators
used by S&P include per capita income in the city relative to the nation and the market value of
property in the city on a per capita basis. While these factors are largely outside the city’s control,
continued redevelopment efforts can help contribute to movement on these measures.
Goal: Conduct unqualified audit on prior year’s financial statements with clean findings annually over
the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
1 finding 0 findings 0 findings 0 findings TBD
Status: Not completed. MMKR completed unqualified audits on financial statements from 2016 to 2019.
The 2016 audit revealed that certain vendor claims were not paid within the time frame required
by state statute. The issue from 2016 was corrected and future audits revealed no findings.
Goal: Complete or improve star rating for three or more best practices through the Minnesota
GreenStep Cities program in 2020.
Status: New for 2020.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 29
ELECTIONS
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
80.31%N/A 74.51%N/A TBD
Goal: Achieve at least 55% voter turnout rate for gubernatorial races and at least 80% voter turnout
rate for presidential races over the next five years.
Status: On track. The city had an 80.31% voter turnout rate for the 2016 presidential election and a
74.51% turnout rate for the 2018 gubernatorial election. No elections were held in 2017 or 2019.
ASSESSING
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$1,430,939,117 $1,535,054,114 $1,697,092,365 $1,831,436,951 $2,021,382,123 TBD
COMMUNICATIONS
Goal: Increase total city taxable property market value by $50 million per year over the next five years.
Status: On track. Taxable property market value for the city increased by $104 million (7.28%) between
2015 and 2016, $162 million (10.56%) between 2016 and 2017, $134 million (7.92%) between 2017
and 2018, and $190 million (10.37%) between 2018 and 2019. Overall, taxable property market
value for the city has increased by 41.26% since 2015.
Goal: Write and coordinate distribution of 12 In the Pipeline utility bill inserts annually over the next
three years.
Status: On track. In the Pipeline was distributed monthly in 2019 with city utility bills.
2019 2020 2021
12 TBD TBD
Goal: Execute more than 100 reader board updates annually over the next three years.
Status: New for 2020. Data from 2019 was not tracked due to the departure of communications
coordinator.
Goal: Update the city’s website with news features 80 times in 2019.
Status: Completed. There were 151 news feature updates made to the city’s website in 2019.
Goal: Post to the city’s social media platforms five times per week in 2019.
Status: Completed. There were 643 social media posts made in 2019, including 477 Facebook posts, 46
Instagram posts, and 120 NextDoor posts. This resulted in an average of 12.37 posts per week.
Goal: Write and coordinate distribution of four In Touch newsletters annually over the next three years.
Status: New for 2020.
Goal: Update the city’s website with news features 100 times annually over the next three years.
Status: New for 2020.
Goal: Increase the city’s social media following by 15% annually over the next three years.
Status: New for 2020.
Goal: Increase the traffic to the city’s website by 10% annually over the next three years.
Status: New for 2020.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 30
HUMAN RESOURCES
2019 2020 2021
5.4%TBD TBD
Goal: Maintain full-time employee turnover rate of 12% or below over the next three years.
Status: On track. The full-time employee turnover for 2019 was 5.4%.
Goal: Maintain or decrease average historic Experience Modification Rate (EMR) from 2013-2017 for
2018-2022.
2013-2017 2018-2022
1.33 1.07
Status: On track. The city’s Experience Modification Rate (EMR) was 1.08 in 2018 and 1.05 in 2019. An
EMR gauges the past cost of injuries and future chances of risk, impacting the cost of the city’s
worker compensation insurance premiums. The industry benchmark average EMR is 1.0. An EMR
of less than 1.0 would effectively reduce the premium paid, where an EMR greater than 1.0 would
increase the premium paid. The EMR for 2019-2020 is calculated using 2015, 2016, and 2017 data.
PLANNING
Goal: Increase population as reported by the 2010 census by at least 3% by the 2020 census.
2010 2020
20,339 TBD
Status: In progress. The American Community Survey estimated the city’s population at 20,907 in 2019.
The U.S. Census is conducted every 10 years and is scheduled to take place in 2020.
Goal: Increase median household value by at least 3% over the next five years.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$188,500 $196,000 $213,000 $229,000 $244,000 TBD
Status: On track. Median household value for the city increased by 3.98% between 2015 and 2016, 8.67%
between 2016 and 2017, 7.51% between 2017 and 2018, and 6.55% between 2018 and 2019.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 31
PUBLIC SAFETY
PUBLIC SAFETY
Goal: Complete a minimum of 70 hours of department-wide training per year over the next three years.
Status: On track. Officers receive a minimum of 60 hours of training per year. Each year the department
receives additional training in de-escalation, implicit bias, and individual administrative and/or
tactical training
2019 2020 2021
80+ hours TBD TBD
Goal: Complete a minimum of eight inter/intra-jurisdictional traffic details over the next three years.
Status: On track. In 2019, Officer Kaitlyn Baker participated in several details, some of which took place in
New Hope.
2019 2020 2021
8 TBD TBD
Goal: Implement new computer-based training for continuing education purposes in 2019.
Status: Completed. “Patrol Online” begins in 2020. This computer-based learning program through the
League of Minnesota Cities offers a variety of additional training in implicit bias, de-escalation,
and other areas.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 32
RESERVES/EXPLORERS
Goal: Maintain a minimum staffing level of eight active police reserves per year over the next three
years.
Status: On track. The reserve unit continues to recruit and train staff.
2019 2020 2021
8 TBD TBD
Goal: Maintain a minimum staffing level of four police explorers per year over the next three years.
Status: On track. In 2019 there were four explorers who achieved statewide recognition for their work.
2019 2020 2021
5 TBD TBD
Goal: Complete at least 33 community education and outreach programs per year over the next three
years.
Status: On track. Community services continues to find innovative ways to provide services for residents.
2019 2020 2021
35 TBD TBD
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 33
FIRE & EMS
Goal: Attract a minimum of 50 firefighter candidates each year recruiting takes place over the next 10 years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
47 N/A 54 N/A TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Not completed. The West Metro Fire-Rescue District had 47 applicants in 2016, nearly reaching its
goal of 50, and hired 11 recruit firefighters. In 2018, there were 54 applicants with 10 recruits hired.
No recruiting took place in 2017 or 2019.
Goal: Receive $50,000 in grants, reimbursements, and donations annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$42,526 $91,067 $50,214 $136,156 TBD
Status: Not completed. In 2019, $136,156 was received in grants, reimbursements, and donations. That
included $38,500 in donations, four training reimbursements from the Minnesota Board of Fire
Training and Education (MBFTE) for $56,938, a grant from the Minnesota State Fire Marshal for
a gear washer and extractor in the amount of $5,307 reimbursements of $2,011 from Hennepin
County for participating in a radiation emergency drill at the Monticello Nuclear Power Plant,
and $33,400 in reimbursements from Hennepin County for the Life Safety Unit (LSU). The SMART
Goals report was amended in 2017 to include donations.
Goal: Complete a minimum of 30 Home Safety Surveys annually over the next five years.
Status: On track. The West Metro Fire-Rescue District completed 41 Home Safety Surveys in 2019, 18 of
which were in New Hope. The voluntary program is a free service for residential homeowners
in which firefighters evaluate for hazards by completing a room-by-room walk-through of the
home. If a hazard is found, the firefighter provides recommendations on how to correct the issue.
Firefighters check all smoke and carbon monoxide (CO) detectors to verify they are properly
located and functioning correctly. If needed, they will provide and install new smoke and CO
detectors. The Home Safety Survey takes about an hour to complete. If the homeowners’ family is
present, firefighters will discuss escape planning, meeting places, and sleeping with closed doors.
The Home Safety Survey also provides fire extinguishers, a night-light/flashlight, a cooking timer,
and a fire safety booklet.
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
41 TBD TBD TBD TBD
Goal: Exceed the district firefighter minimum training requirement of 44 hours annually by an average
of 44 hours per firefighter per year (88 hours total) for the next five years.
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
141 TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: On track. In 2019, 46 West Metro Fire-Rescue District paid, on-call firefighters each averaged 141
hours of training. Additionally, nine recruits each averaged 375 hours of training, including fire
academy hours.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 34
PROTECTIVE INSPECTIONS
Goal: Perform at least 600 code compliance investigations annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020
955 1,147 1,546 1,419 TBD TBD
Status: On track. City inspectors have completed an average of 1,267 code compliance investigations per
year between 2016 and 2019.
ANIMAL CONTROL
Goal: Maintain average number of goose nests in city from 2016-2018 at same level for 2019-2021.
2016-2018 2019-2021
7.33 5
Status: On track. There were five nests recorded in 2019, lower than the average number recorded
between 2016 and 2018.
Goal: Collect $1,500,000 in permit fees between 2019 and 2021.
Status: In progress. The city generated $452,267 in permit fees in 2019.
2019 2020 2021
$452,267 TBD TBD
Goal: Generate $100,000,000 in value of work for permits issued between 2019 and 2021.
Status: On track. Total valuation of work completed in city in 2019 was $38,064,766.
2019 2020 2021
$38,064,766 TBD TBD
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 35
ENGINEERING
Goal: Input new assets into asset management program relative to infrastructure projects upon project
completion and availability of record drawings.
Status: In progress. Data from 2018 has been uploaded and data from 2019 will be uploaded in 2020.
STREETS
Goal: Complete and deliver record plan drawings from the past five years of projects in 2018.
Status: Completed. Staff has received and updated record plans from all 2018 projects.
Goal: Dedicate engineering and public works staff time to inflow and infiltration (I and I) investigation.
Status: In progress. Suspected infiltration areas have been investigated by staff and projects to reduce I
and I have been identified for 2020.
STREETS
Goal: Increase Pavement Rating Index for city roads over the next five years, while maintaining an
average of 70 or higher.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
75 76 76 76 TBD
Status: On track. It is anticipated that the city’s Pavement Rating Index will continue to increase after
completion of the 2020 infrastructure and maintenance projects.
Goal: Update pavement management plan annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD
Status: On track. A 10-year pavement management plan was created in 2016. The plan extends through
2027 and is updated annually.
RECREATION
Goal: Increase overall program registrations from 2018 by 3% for 2019.
2018 2019
7,366 7,094
Status: Not completed. Registrations decreased by 3.69% due in large part to there not being a national
dance competition.
PARKS
Goal: Replace minimum of one playground structure per year over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
1 1 1 1 TBD
Status: On track. In 2016, the playground at Northwood Park was replaced. The playground structure at
Fred Sims Park was replaced in 2017. In 2018, the playground at Sunnyside Park was replaced.
Jaycee Park was replaced in 2019.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 36
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA)
Goal: Facilitate the construction or renovation of an average of four scattered site single-family homes
per year between 2019 and 2021.
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
2019 2020 2021
3 TBD TBD
Status: In progress. Staff has developed a proactive approach to engage potential sellers of distressed
and/or functionally obsolete properties in an effort to secure purchase contracts before homes
are offered on the open market. In 2019, three EDA projects were completed, with new homes
being sold to private owners. This included demolition and rebuild projects at 7215 62nd Avenue
North and 7311 62nd Avenue North and new construction at 3856 Maryland Avenue North,
parkland that was previously owner by the city of Crystal. In 2019 the EDA also sold the lot at
5201 Oregon Avenue North to a builder, approved a proposal for two new homes on EDA-owned
lots at 5353 and 5355 Oregon Avenue North, and approved a rehabilitation contract for the EDA-
owned home at 3924 Utah Avenue North. Projects will be included in the count upon completion
and sale of the home. Since the scattered site housing program was re-instituted in 2014, the
acquisition of distressed single-family homes and vacant lots has resulted in the construction or
rehabilitation of 22 homes (some currently in progress).
Goal: Attract at least 10 new businesses per year over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
31 26 17 26 TBD
Status: On track. The city has attracted an average of 25 new businesses per year between 2016 and
2019.
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Goal: Maintain 80% or greater recycling participation rate over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
92%92.5%91.2%92.4%TBD
Status: On track. The city achieved a 92% recycling participation rate in 2016, a 92.5% rate in 2017,
a 91.2% rate in 2018, and a 92.4% participation rate in 2019, for an average of 92.03%. The
participation rate includes all residential properties, up to eight units, located in the city.
Goal: Average 450 pounds recycled per household per year over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
592 pounds 519.6 pounds 564.2 pounds 430.5 pounds TBD
Status: On track. The city has averaged 526.6 pounds of material recycled between 2016 and 2019.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 37
PARK INFRASTRUCTURE
Goal: Increase levy by 3% per year over the next five years to increase funds available for park
improvements.
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$304,880 $314,026 $323,450 $333,150 $349,800 TBD
Status: On track. The park infrastructure levy increased by at least 3% each of the last four years. An
additional $100,000 has been levied for the ice arena each of the last three years, for a total of
$300,000.
STREET INFRASTRUCTURE
Goal: Reconstruct or mill and overlay streets as proposed in five-year Capital Improvement Plan.
Status: In progress. A total of 0.5 miles were fully reconstructed and 9.5 miles were crack filled, seal
coated, and fog sealed in 2019, for a total of 10 miles of improved streets.
Goal: Increase resident awareness of projects in the next five years.
Status: In progress. Construction websites have been maintained for all major construction and
infrastructure projects in the city, including live updates for seal coat/fog seal activities that
impact resident traffic.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 38
SANITARY SEWER
Goal: Clean all city sewers at least every four years.
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
2016 2017 2018 2019
24 miles 17 miles 21 miles 22.5 miles
Status: Completed. City staff cleaned 22.5 of the city’s 70 miles of sewer in 2019, as scheduled. Staff
created new sewer maps so that maintenance workers can view progress towards sewer cleaning
completion goals.
Goal: Implement inflow and infiltration program for private residences in the next five years.
Status: In progress. Public works and engineering staff are working on a study with Metropolitan Council
and other partners to target specific infiltration areas for effective educational campaigns. Target
areas have been identified as projects in 2020.
Goal: Implement two-year sewer lining contracts and increase feet per year installed of lining.
Status: On track. City and engineering staff are studying infiltration patterns to increase the effectiveness
of sewer lining in targeted areas. It is unlikely the 2019 project area will be known until this study
is completed. Due to the timing of the study, staff will likely need to bid the 2019 project without
knowing the 2020 lining area.
WATER
Goal: Continue involvement with Joint Water Commission (JWC) water supply system by attending
regular meetings in 2019.
Status: Completed. Staff attended all JWC meetings in 2019.
Goal: Exercise 10% of water valves annually over the next five years.
Status: Not completed. The city exercised 118 of its 1,118 water valves, or 10.6%, in 2018. It exercised 64
of its valves, or 5.7%. in 2019. Staff originally intended to exercise 10% of valves per year, but the
goal was reduced to 5% in 2019. Staff will be required to split time between efforts to exercise
valves and cataloging residential service valves.
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
10.6%5.7%TBD TBD TBD
STORM WATER
Goal: Improve water quality in Northwood Lake in the next five years.
Status: In progress. In 2019 Bassett Creek Watershed evaluated Northwood Lake for a variety of
environmental indicators. Phosphorus, chlorophyll, and water clarity improved from the last
measurements taken in 2017.
Goal: Database Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) and inventory public and private
systems in the next two years.
Status: In progress. All new public and private systems will be entered into the city’s MS4 database. Public
systems have been entered and cataloging of private systems will be completed in 2020.
Goal: Improve water quality in both the Shingle Creek and Bassett Creek watershed districts.
Status: In progress. Projects were implemented in both watershed districts in 2019.
Goal: Locate and catalog 20% of all residential service valves annually over the next five years.
Status: New for 2020. When digitizing Public Works records, staff discovered that many property files do
not have accurate information regarding the location of the water shut off valve to the home.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 39
STREET LIGHTING
Goal: Replace aging city-owned lighting infrastructure on 42nd Avenue and convert to LED in 2018.
Status: Completed. The lights along 42nd Avenue were replaced in 2019.
Goal: Conduct improvements with the county at the signal lighting system at Boone and 42nd avenues.
Status: In progress. The lighting system is scheduled to be replaced in the spring of 2021.
GOLF COURSE
ICE ARENA
Goal: Increase number of golf rounds purchased in 2018 by 3% per year from 2019-2021.
Status: Not completed. The number of rounds purchased decreased by 5.41% between 2018 and 2019.
2018 2019 2020 2021
17,800 16,837 TBD TBD
Goal: Increase ice hours rented in 2018 by 2% for 2019.
2018 2019
4,151 4,202
Status: Not completed. The number of ice hours rented increased by 1.23% between 2018 and 2019.
Goal: Increase open skating attendance in 2018 by 5% for 2019.
2018 2019
2,204 2,594
Status: Completed. Open skating attendance increased by 17.7% between 2018 and 2019.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
PAGE 40
CENTRAL GARAGE
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Goal: Evaluate goals and needs for potential central garage expansion in 2018.
Status: In progress. Engineering and design of the expansion began in the spring of 2019.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Goal: Recycle 25% of desktop/laptop computers each year in conjunction with the four-year
replacement schedule.
2016 2017 2018 2019
24%27.5%24%26.4%
Status: Not completed. Staff replaced 23 of the 96 city-owned computers in 2016, one short of meeting
the 25% replacement goal. The city added two computers to its fleet in 2017 and replaced 27 of
the 98 machines. In 2018, staff replaced 24 of the 99 city-owned computers.
Goal: Recycle 20% of desktop/laptop computers each year in conjunction with the five-year
replacement schedule.
Status: New for 2020.