011822 Work Session Meeting Packet
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION MEETING
New Hope City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue North
Northwood Conference Room
Tuesday, January 18, 2022
6:00 p.m. ‐ dinner
6:30 p.m. ‐ meeting
Mayor Kathi Hemken
Council Member John Elder
Council Member Andy Hoffe
Council Member Michael Isenberg
Council Member Jonathan London
1. CALL TO ORDER – January 18, 2022
2. ROLL CALL
11. UNFINISHED & ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS
11.1 Discuss Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail with Three Rivers Park District Staff
11.2 Discussion on memorials/donations, naming of facilities, and dedications
11.3 Update on city’s participation in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program
11.4 Discuss use of 2022 Community Development Block Grant funds
11.5 Discuss Public Works Project Updates
11.6 Review updated financial management plan with Abdo
11.7 Discussion regarding federal funding received
12. OTHER BUSINESS
13. ADJOURNMENT
I:\RFA\P&R\3 Rivers Park District\2022\CP Rail Regional Trail\11.1 Q ‐ CP Rail Regional Trail Master Plan.docx
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: Parks & Recreation
By: Susan Rader, Director
Agenda Title
Discuss Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail with Three Rivers Park District Staff
Requested Action
Staff requests that the City Council discuss the Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail (CP Rail Regional Trail,
or CPRRT) with Three Rivers Park District and city staff. Danny McCullough, Regional Trail System Manager
and Kelly Grissman, Director of Planning will attend to lead the discussion which will include introducing
the project, outlining their process and asking for Council support to move forward with their planning.
Commissioner Marge Beard may also be in attendance.
Policy/Past Practice
Past policy and practice has been to provide the Council with program, facility and infrastructure updates
and receive input and feedback.
Background
The Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail (CP Rail Regional Trail, or CPRRT) is a planned 21‐mile regional
trail corridor that will extend from Becker Park in Crystal south to the Minnesota River, connecting six
communities – New Hope, Crystal, Golden Valley, St. Louis Park, Edina and Bloomington. The proposed trail
alignment will also connect to three regional trail search corridors and six regional trails, including the
Bassett Creek Regional Trail which runs east‐west through New Hope mostly along 36th Avenue and through
Northwood Park.
The Park District has a general master plan for the entire corridor but are now preparing to start their master
planning for the segment of trail that would run through Crystal, New Hope and Golden Valley. In
December, staff from the three cities attended a meeting to learn more about the project, process and timeline.
A copy of the meeting minutes is attached.
Attachments
CP Rail Regional Trail Kick Off Information Sheet
December 2021 Meeting minutes
New Hope Comprehensive Plan excerpt
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.1
CP Rail Regional Trail: Golden Valley/New Hope/Crystal
Luce Line RT to Crystal Lake RT Segment (Segments E and F)
Introductory Information
Golden Valley: TBD
New Hope: Citizen Advisory Commission – TBD; City Council Work Session ‐ January 18, 2022
Crystal: Crystal Park and Recreation Commission – February 2, 2022; City Council ‐ TBD
Three Rivers Park District Co‐Project Managers
Kelly Grissman, Director of Planning
Kelly.Grissman@threeriversparks.org
Danny McCullough, Regional Trail System Manager
Danny.McCullough@threeriversparks.org
Project Introduction
The CP Rail Regional Trail is envisioned as a north‐south multi‐use,
non‐motorized recreational corridor spanning from the
Minnesota Valley State Trail in Bloomington to Crystal Lake
Regional Trail in Crystal at Becker Park. The regional trail will be
planned in segments to allow for thoughtful community
engagement and detailed route analysis. This phase will focus on
Segments E and F through Golden Valley, New Hope and Crystal
between the Luce Line and Crystal Lake Regional Trails.
The regional trail corridor was originally centered along the CP
Rail line; however, this is not feasible for the majority of the
corridor. Alternative routes will need to be identified and studied
to determine which option best balances feasibility, cost, private
property impacts, and safety.
Initial Questions:
1) Any concerns with proceeding with master planning at
this time?
2) Any local priorities/goals to consider/incorporate into the
planning process?
3) Any routes/destinations to consider/avoid?
4) Any projects/opportunities to try to collaborate with?
5) What are the City’s community engagement expectations/ideas?
Tentative Schedule/Process:
Project Phase Timeframe Park/Rec/Open Space/Etc.
Commission Check‐in
City Council Check‐in
Kick Off Jan‐Feb 2022 Yes
Route Identification March‐April 2022 Yes – will help identify
routes/destinations
Yes – will approve routes for
study/engagement
Route Assessment/Public
Engagement
June‐July 2022 No official check‐in, but will be kept informed of
opportunities/public sentiment
Route Review/Approval Aug‐Sept 2022 Yes
30‐day Comment Period Fall 2022 N/A
Master Plan Adoption Winter 2022‐23 Yes – Resolution of Support will be requested
I:\RFA\P&R\MISC\2022\Memorials and Dedications\11.2 Q ‐ Memorials and Dedications.docx
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: Parks & Recreation
By: Susan Rader, Director
Agenda Title
Discussion on memorials/donations, naming of facilities, and dedications
Requested Action
Staff requests direction from the City Council on renaming the athletic fields at Northwood Park in memory of
Art Field and dedicating the bridge at Northwood Park in recognition of Harvey Feldman.
Policy/Past Practice
It is a past practice to request input on programs and policies.
Background
Throughout the year, staff receives donations from local organizations and business for programs and special
events. On occasion, staff will also have contact with a resident or someone who has a connection with the
city and is interested in making a donation honoring a special person. Past memorials and donations have
included benches, trees, flower boxes and donations to the scholarship program or another specific program.
In addition, staff have also added dedication/memorial plaques recognizing the service of employees or
volunteers to benches, or next to trees and landscaping areas.
The city policy of naming parks and facilities outlines specific criteria to be used as guidelines including:
Geographic location – a name representative of neighborhood, street, subdivision, natural habitat,
outstanding feature, nearby landmark, or other characteristics of the site.
Contributor – an individual or organization who has donated land or made a significant financial
contribution (50% or greater) towards a park or facility.
Famous American or Occasion – state or federal leaders or a historical event.
The policy acknowledges that recognition of an individual, business, or organization can be made in the form of
a memorial (trees, park bench, flagpole, plaque, or art object displayed on city property). The donor is
responsible for the cost of the object, installation, and any on‐going maintenance costs.
The policy also states that the City Council has the authority to make exceptions to the policy.
On November 13, 2021, longtime New Hope supporter and volunteer, Art Field passed away. In addition to
his many volunteer hours with the New Hope Lions, Duk Duk Daze, Farmer’s Market and other city events
and activities, he also worked as a seasonal employee for the parks and recreation department, including
parks, ice arena and golf course. His years of service and dedication to New Hope was greatly appreciated
and staff had been discussing various opportunities to honor his dedication. Police CSO Scott Anderson
made a request to the City Council and staff to rename the athletic fields at Northwood Park in memory of
Art and staff feels this would be a perfect tribute. If Council is supportive, staff will purchase a sign similar to
the park name signs and have it installed near the softball fields. The purchase would be made through the
Parks Infrastructure Fund.
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.2
Request for Action, Page 2
The Field Family recognized Art’s love for the city of New Hope and asked for memorial donations to be
made to the parks and recreation department in lieu of flowers. Staff will be working with the family this
winter to determine a specific use for the donations received. Once a decision has been made, staff will share
the details with the Council.
In December, Mary and Jere Gwin‐Lenth contacted Mayor Hemken and requested that one of the bridges at
Northwood Park be dedicated to Harvey Feldman. Mr. Feldman was New Hope’s first parks and recreation
director from 1963‐1969 and was instrumental in creating the park system. He’s always had a special
connection with Northwood Park and is a neighbor of the park. The Gwin‐Lenth’s have offered to pay for the
signage. Staff supports recognizing Mr. Feldman’s contributions and if the Council agrees, staff recommends
purchasing a sign through the Parks budget and installing it near the bridge.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve renaming the athletic fields at Northwood Park in memory
of Art Field and dedicating the bridge at Northwood Park in recognition of Harvey Feldman.
Attachments
Memorials & Donations information flyer
Naming of Parks and Facilities policy
November 16 email from Scott Anderson
Art Field obituary
Draft of sign
Northwood Park map
NAMING OF PARKS AND FACILITIES
1.0 POLICY
These criterion will be used as general guidelines when naming or renaming parks, park trails,
recreational facilities, and city facilities.
2.0 ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED:
Community-wide.
3.0 PROCEDURE:
3.1 The naming of city parks and city facilities will be given consideration by the City Council
based on:
Geographic Location – a name representative of neighborhood, street, subdivision,
natural habitat, outstanding feature, nearby landmark, or other characteristics of the site.
Contributor – an individual or organization who has donated land or made a significant
financial contribution (50% or greater) towards a park or facility.
Famous American or Occasion – state or federal leaders or a historical event.
3.2 Consistent with the Council recommendation in 1985, recognition of an individual, business,
or organization can be made in the form of a memorial (i.e. trees, park bench, flag pole,
plaque, or art object displayed on city property). The donor is responsible for the cost of the
object, installation, and any on-going maintenance costs. Plaques shall not exceed 225
square inches. Other memorials will also be limited in size dependent upon the item and
location.
3.3 Renaming of a city park will only be considered if the neighborhood changes in nature either
by composition of residents or the composition of the surrounding area.
3.4 The City Council has authority to make exceptions to the policy.
I:/AdministMan/NamingFacilities.doc
04/07/2000
I:\RFA\COMM DEV\2022\Work Session\01‐18‐22 GreenSteps\11.3 Q ‐ WS Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program 01‐18‐22.docx
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: Community Development
By: Jeff Alger, Community Development Specialist;
Jeff Sargent, Director of Community Development
Agenda Title
Update on city’s participation in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program
Requested Action
Staff requests to provide an update on the city’s participation in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program.
Policy/Past Practice
Pursuing initiatives that promote sustainability and fiscal responsibility is consistent with the city’s
Comprehensive Plan as well as its values and vision. The city has made various efforts to be sustainable and
environmentally friendly, including joining the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program in 2015.
Background
The city continues to participate in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program as it strives to promote
sustainability. The free continuous improvement program, managed by a public‐private partnership, is
based upon 29 best practices comprised of 175 best practice actions. Each best practice can be implemented
by completing one or more actions at a one, two, or three‐star level, from a list of four to eight actions. These
actions are tailored to all Minnesota cities, focus on cost savings and energy use reduction, and encourage
civic innovation. The program recognizes cities for their accomplishments by assigning one of the following
step levels:
Step 1: for cities that have passed a city council resolution to work on implementing best practices of
their own choice and at their own pace.
Step 2: for cities that have implemented any eight best practices.
Step 3: for cities that have implemented an additional eight best practices and completed a handful of
specific high‐impact actions.
Step 4: for cities that report eight core city performance metrics and five additional metrics of their
choice each year.
Step 5: for cities that report improvement upon any three eligible metric elements.
New Hope received “Step 1” recognition in the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program by adopting a
participation resolution on January 12, 2015. After an inventory of completed best practice actions was
prepared and posted to the program’s website, it was determined that the city had completed at least eight
Best Practices, meeting the requirement to reach “Step 2” of the program. The award was presented to the
city on June 26, 2015, at the League of Minnesota Cities annual conference. The city reached “Step 3” of the
program on June 15, 2016, after completing 70 best practice actions. The city was presented the 2017 League
of Minnesota Cities Sustainable City Award on June 15, 2017, as a result of completed best practices related
to the Northwood Lake stormwater improvement project. The award is given each year to a single city that
has implemented a project, program, or initiative that is helping the city achieve its sustainability goals
through implementation of one or more of the GreenStep Cities program’s 29 best practices. In September of
2017, the city installed 14 GreenStep Cities road signs near entrances to the city. Every year city staff reviews
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.3
Request for Action, Page 2
all new actions completed within the city and submits those that are applicable for review. The following
newly completed actions were reviewed by staff with the Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program in 2021:
The city now participates in Hennepin Countyʹs pre‐demolition inspection program to ensure all
regulated materials (such as appliances, electronics, fluorescent lightbulbs, etc.) are removed and
properly managed before demolition work begins. The goal of the program is to keep problem
materials out of landfills and ensure proper management of waste. The reuse and recycling of
building materials is also promoted during inspections. Hennepin County staff conducts the
inspections with contractors and requests applicable demolition documentation from contractors
including MPCA 10‐day notifications, asbestos/hazardous material survey, and disposal manifests.
West Metro Rescue Fire Station #3 at 4251 Xylon Avenue North upgraded to LED interior lighting. A
rebate of $7,534 was obtained through Xcel Energy and a $3,000 grant was awarded through the
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce Business Efficiency Grant Program. The city contributed $7,830
and West Metro Fire Rescue contributed $7,831 to the project. Total cost of the project was $26,194
with an expected payback period as a result of the improvements of five years.
City staff has adopted five storm drains in 2021 near City Hall at 4401 Xylon Avenue North through
the statewide ʺAdopt a Drainʺ program. The drains are checked and cleared of debris twice a month
by city staff who have volunteered to assist.
The new police station/city hall is equipped with several water bottle filling stations that count and
display the number of plastic bottles that have been saved as a result of its use. A similar model was
installed at the Public Works Central Garage.
These actions resulted in the city receiving credit for the completion of one new best practice action. Most of
the items that were submitted qualified as best practice actions in categories that had already been
completed, thus they did not have an impact on the number or star rating for certain best practice actions.
With 92 completed best practice actions, the city of New Hope ranks fourth amongst 144 participating cities
in total number completed.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Program Level Step 2 Step 3 Step 3 Step 3 Step 3 Step 3 Step 3
Sustainable City Award ✓
Best Practices 15 18 21 24 24 25 25
1‐Star Actions 37 40 41 45 46 47 47
2‐Star Actions 19 21 26 28 31 31 32
3‐Star Actions 9 9 9 10 11 13 13
Best Practice Actions 65 70 76 83 88 91 92
A list of all best practice actions completed by New Hope and implementation details can be found at
https://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/city‐detail/12307.
Steps 4 & 5
The Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program began implementing newly created “Step 4” and “Step 5” levels in
2016. The new steps challenge cities to measure and report the aggregate and quantitative results of multiple
actions taken in an attempt to present the “state of sustainability” achieved by a city. The purpose is to make
cities accustomed to gathering data annually and comparing the data over time. It gives cities the
Request for Action, Page 3
opportunity to find out where they stand and compare to others. In order to receive “Step 4” recognition,
cities must record eight required core metrics selected by the program and five metrics of choice selected by
the city. Each metric contains multiple metric elements, all of which must be completed. In order to receive
“Step 5” recognition, over the course of one year, cities must improve upon any three of the eligible metric
elements. New Hope has not pursued either of the steps at this time.
Recommendation
With 92 completed best practice actions, staff has documented all known accomplishments relating to
sustainability within the city. In recent years, the City Council has directed staff to continue to utilize the
Minnesota GreenStep Cities Program as it currently does, as a resource to help achieve its sustainability
goals through the implementation of best practices. Any newly completed best practice actions would
continue to be recorded. In regards to pursuing “Step 4,” staff does not believe all of the required core metric
data is tracked and/or easily attainable. If the City Council would like to pursue “Step 4” of the program,
additional research can be conducted on how best to track each of the required metrics. It is estimated that it
would take between 70‐100 hours of staff time to gather and submit the required data.
Attachments
Summary of 29 Best Practices
New Hope GreenStep Cities informational sheet
2021 GreenStep Cities assessment summary
Minnesota GreenStep Cities grew out of a report to the 2009 Legislature. The program is governed by a public-private partnership of state agencies and non-
governmental organizations and is led by the MPCA.
GreenStep Cities is a free assistance program for all Minnesota cities that supports and
recognizes implementation of 29 sustainability best practices.
The best practices focus on cost savings, quality of life and energy use reductions that encourage a culture of
innovation. As of June 2021, 140 cities (and four Tribal Nations), large and small, encompassing over 52% of
the state’s population, have joined and been recognized as Step One cities in this voluntary program, which
was launched by the League of Minnesota Cities at their June 2010 conference.
Cities that implement a minimum number of best practices within the five categories below will be recognized
as Step Two and Step Three GreenStep cities. Each best practice can be implemented by completing one or
more specific actions from a list of four to eight actions. A city’s accomplishments are listed and recognized on
the GreenStep website. Measuring city performance metrics will garner Step Four & Step Five recognition.
Visit www.MnGreenStep.org to learn more about this program, to see what cities have accomplished, and to
understand how your city can become involved.
GreenStep’s 29 Best Practices
1. Efficient Existing Public Buildings: Benchmark energy usage, identify savings opportunities, and work with
utilities and others to implement cost-effective energy and sustainability improvements.
2. Efficient Existing Private Buildings: Provide incentives for energy, water and sustainability improvements
in existing buildings and building sites.
3. New Green Buildings: Construct new buildings to meet or qualify under a green building framework.
4. Efficient Outdoor Lighting and Signals: Improve the efficiency of public lighting and signals.
5. Building Reuse: Create economic and regulatory incentives for redeveloping and repurposing existing
buildings before building new.
6. Comprehensive Plans: Adopt a Comprehensive Plan and tie regulatory ordinances to it.
7. Resilient City Growth: Promote financial and environmental sustainability by enabling and encouraging
higher density housing and commercial land use .
8. Mixed Uses: Develop efficient and healthy land patterns that generate community wealth.
9. Efficient Highway- and Auto-Oriented Development: Adopt commercial development and design
standards for auto-oriented development corridors and clusters.
10. Natural Resource Conservation Design: Adopt development ordinances or processes that protect natural
systems and valued community assets.
11. Living Streets: Create a network of green complete streets that improves city quality of life and adds value
to surrounding properties.
12. Mobility Options: Promote active living and alternatives to single-occupancy car travel.
13. Efficient City Fleets: Implement a city fleet investment, operations and maintenance plan.
14. Demand-Side Travel Planning: Implement Travel Demand Management and Transit-Oriented Design in
service of a more walkable city.
15. Sustainable Purchasing: Adopt environmentally preferable purchasing practices and policies.
16. Urban Forests: Add city tree and plant cover that increases community health, wealth and quality of life.
17. Stormwater Management: Minimize the volume of and pollutants in rainwater runoff by maximizing
green infrastructure.
18. Parks and Trails: Support active lifestyles and property values by enhancing green infrastructure.
19. Surface Water Quality: Improve local water bodies to sustain their long-term ecological function and
community benefits.
20. Efficient Water and Wastewater Systems: Assess and improve drinking water and wastewater systems
and related facilities.
21. Septic Systems: Implement an effective management program for decentralized wastewater systems.
22. Solid Waste Reduction: Increase waste reduction, reuse and recycling.
23. Local Air Quality: Prevent generation of local air contaminants to improve community health.
24. Benchmarks & Community Engagement: Adopt outcome measures for GreenStep and other city
sustainability efforts, and engage community members in ongoing education, discussion, and campaigns.
25. Green Business Development: Support expansion of a greener, more resilient business sector.
26. Renewable Energy: Remove barriers to and encourage installation of renewable
energy generation capacity.
27. Local Food: Strengthen local food and fiber production and access.
28. Business Synergies: Network/cluster businesses to achieve better energy, economic
and environmental outcomes.
29. Climate Adaptation & Community Resilience: Plan and prepare for extreme weather, adapt to changing
climatic conditions, and foster stronger community connectedness and social and economic vitality.
City of New Hope – “Step 3” Minnesota GreenStep City
Program Overview
• Implements sustainability via 29 proven best practices and 175 best practice actions.
• Features an encyclopedic collection of best practices, links to state-of-the-art articles and free expert consultants,
and constantly updated progress reports from participating cities.
• Reduces costs through building efficiency, improves overall quality of life, and provides extensive framework for
“going green” and being recognized for it.
• With 92 completed best practice actions, New Hope ranks 4th of 144 participating cities in total number completed.
New Hope - Step 1 & Step 2
• Reached Step 1 in 2015 after adopting a participation resolution.
• Reached Step 2 in 2015 by completing 8+ best practices. Notable best practice actions completed include:
o Complete Streets Policy.
o Energy Improvement Project through McKinstry, which included lighting auto shut-off controls, vending
machine controls, and water conservation efforts at city facilities as well as a new efficient refrigeration
system, new dehumidification system, and new roof on the north rink at the New Hope Ice Arena.
o 160,000-gallon underground water storage tank at Northwood Lake used to irrigate athletic fields.
o Programs offered through Center for Energy and Environment, including Home Energy Squad visits,
financing and rehabilitation services, and one-stop efficiency shop lighting retrofits.
o Bicycle parking requirements within commercial districts.
o Safe Routes to School grant and improvements.
o LED lighting replacements for traffic signals, streetlights, and lighting at city facilities.
Step 3
• Reached Step 3 in 2016 by completing 16+ best practices, including some specific best practice actions.
• Of the 129 cities that participate, 49 have reached “Step 3” or higher.
• Best practice actions completed that contribute to Step 3 recognition include:
o Energy efficient and environmentally friendly technology, equipment, and building materials used in the
construction of the new police station/city hall.
o Adoption of Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy, which requires that the city use recycled paper,
purchase Energy Star certified equipment and appliances, purchase WaterSense certified fixtures, and use
environmentally-friendly cleaning products.
o Establishment of solar energy system regulations to allow roof and ground mounted solar energy systems.
o Implementation of employee plastics recycling and participation in Adopt a Drain programs at city hall.
o Participation in Hennepin County’s pre-demolition inspection program.
League of Minnesota Cities 2017 Sustainable City Award
• The city was presented the 2017 LMC Sustainable City Award for the Northwood Park stormwater improvement
project. The award is given each year to a single city that has implemented a project, program, or initiative that is
helping the city achieve its sustainability goals through implementation of one or more best practices.
More Information
• Jeff Alger, Community Development Specialist, 763-531-5119 or jalger@newhopemn.gov.
2022 Category A City: NEW HOPE
Currently a Step 3 GreenStep City as of June 2016
(joined January 2015 )
Assessor and date: Kristin Mroz, 6/9/21
Total BPs done:
Best practices (required in bold) BP implemented? Action summary by # and star level achieved
Action rules (req. actions in bold)
BUILDINGS: distribution requirement is 2 BPs ; are 2 BPs done?
1. Public
Actions 1 & 2; & one action
from actions 3-7
YES
1.1 @ 2 STARS -- data from 2008 to present
1.2 @ 3 STARS -- lighting auto shut-off controls, vending machine controls, and
water conservation efforts
1.3 @ 3 STARS – energy performance contract savings realized for the first year was
$96,381
1.4 @ 3 STARS -- upgraded 11 lift stations with new SCADA
1.5 @ 1 Star - Police Station/City Hall 2019 construction w/ Section 179D Energy-
Efficient Commercial Building Tax Deduction program w/ design assistance from
Xcel, CenterPoint, Willdan Group. $50,932 energy cost savings annually & 4yr pay-
back.
2. Private
any two actions
YES
2.1 @ 3 STAR -- city & CEE offer a big array of financing, discounts, audits, rehab
services
2.4 @ 3 STARS – 2015 Country Kitchen LEDs; Honest-1 Auto Care is 100% ESA
Certified Eco-Friendly; The Food Group donates land for a community farmer's
garden; Now Mart car wash retains all rainwater on-site for car wash reuse -- first
known car wash in the country to utilize such technology
2.5 @ 3 STARS – sprinkling ban ordinance; 2016 160,000-gal underground
rainwater cistern to irrigate nearby ball fields; 2017 city ord. ala state law: all
landscaping with auto irrigation must have moisture sensor contoller
2.6 @ 2 STARS – 5 CEE commercial, non-profit, and rental improvement programs
3. New
action 1 or 2; one from 3-5
NO 3.4 @ 2 STARS – loan for 1/2 the cost of a Variable Refrigerant Flow system for the
IronWood apartment building: coupled with solar power, 50% energy cut (saving =
615,000 gal. of gasoline over 20 yrs.), close to zero emissions
4. Lighting/Signals
2 actions with one from 5-8
YES
4.1 @ 2 STARS – req. for outside: light intensity at/above 90 degrees not more than
2.1% of lamp lumens, and not more than 10% of lamp lumens at a vertical angle of
80 degrees above nadir
4.2 @ 3 STARS – LED lighting for all fixtures with the capability of controlling output
levels
4.3 @ 3 STARS -- street lights with LED fixtures
4.4 @ 1 STAR –2011 & 2018: 2 flashing yellow turn signals
4.5 @ 1 STAR -- 3 PV driver feedback signs near schools
4.6 @ 1 STAR
4.7 @ 1 STAR -- City Hall & Public Works parking lots are Dark-Sky compliant
4.8 @ 3 STARS
5. Reuse
any one action
YES
5.3 @ 1 STAR – elementary to learning center, school district offices, medical
facility
5.4 @ 1 STAR
5.5 @ 1 STAR – 2011 New Hope City Center Vision; Design Guidelines; Comp Plan
goal: "examine, re-evaluate, and promote proper infill development on under-
utilized parcels to ensure full land utilization."
25
YES
YES
LAND USE: 2 BPs required; are 2 BPs done?
6. Comp Plan
Actions 1 & 2
YES
6.1 @ 1 STAR – 2006 update
6.2 @ 2 STARS
6.3 @ 2 STARS -- Flood Control Commission, WM Tax District, N. Metro Mayors
Assoc., W. Metro Fire-Rescue District, TwinWest Chamber, Henn. Recycling Group,
2 shared city pools, W. Metro SWAT
6. 4 @ 1 STAR -- 1998 comp plan reduced front/rear setbacks; 2018 plan supports
redevelopment of obsolete commercial sites
YES
7.1 @ 2 STARS-- City Center zoning allows 10-50 DUA, Residential Business,
Residential Office allow up to 19
7.2 @ 2 STAR – residential density bonus for underground parking, proximity to
transit, multifamily outdoor play area
7.4 @ 1 STAR -- TIF for redevelopment of a K-mart
8. Mixed Uses
any two actions
YES
8.1 @ 2 STARS – 2-11 City Center Vision; 60-mbr. task force on redevelopment of
underutilized / marginal properties
8.2 @ 1 STAR
8.3 @ 1 STAR – city center zoning PUD encourages mixed use
8.5 @ 1 STAR
9. Highway Development
any one action
YES 9.1 @ Not Rated previous participation in a Highway 169 task force
9.2 @ 1 STAR -- part of Connect Blue Line Now Coalition (6 cities) to make the Blue
Line LRT Extension project a reality
10. Conservation Development
any one action
YES 10.3 @ 1 STAR – 2015 tree preservation ordinance protects and preserves trees
when new commercial, industrial, multiple family, and institutional development
takes place
TRANSPORTATION: 2 BPs required; are 2 BPs done?
11. Complete Green Streets
1; & two additional actions
YES
11.1 @ 2 STARS – very good policy document!
11.3 @ 2 STARS
11.4 @ 1 STAR -- Xylon Streetscape Improvements incl. bikes
11.5 @ 3 STARS – extensive trail connections to regional trail & park district
11.6 @ 2 STARS -- 4 lanes to 3 lanes; narrowing of a pedestrian crossing;
12. Mobility Options
any two actions
YES
12.1 @ 3 STARS -- bicycle parking requirements for commercial land uses; very
good public transport page on city web
12.2 @ 2 STARS – significant SRTS grant work over 10+ years
12.3 @ 2 STARS -- grocery/prescription delivery options on web
12.6 @ Not Rated city staff work with Metro Transit to provide feedback on
Service Improvement Plans
13. Fleets
any two actions
YES
13.1 @ 2 STARS -- plow trucks use vehicle tracking systems to evaluate fuel and salt
usage; city staff carpool to meetings when poss.
13.2 @ 2 STARS -- life cycle policy promotes replacement with new, more fuel-
efficient and sustainable vehicles
13.3 @ 1 STAR -- 2011-2012: replaced 3 inefficient inspectors vehicles with energy-
efficient Ford Fusions
14. TOD / TDM
any two actions
YES 14.1 @ 1 STAR -- City Center zoning sets max parking ratio; reduction permitted
based on several specifics (e.g., shared parking)
14.2 @ 2 STARS -- New Hope City Center Vision includes public infrastructure
incentives
14.4 @ 1 STAR -- Traffic studies required for some conditional uses in the city's
Industrial zoning district
ENVIRON MGT: 4 BPs required; are 4 done?
15. Purchasing
1; and one additional action
YES
15.1 @ 2 STARS – amended purchasing policy with paper, EnergyStar, WaterSense,
cleaning products
YES
YES
15.4 @ 1 STAR
15.5 @ 1 STAR – use of "Leap Asphalt" - class 5 recycled asphalt for roadbed
material
15.7 @ 1 STAR
16. Trees
any two actions
YES
16.1 @ 1 STAR -- 2018 Tree City USA
16.3 @ 1 STAR -- $120,000 for replacing trees in parks/blvds
16.4 @ 1 STAR
16.5 @ 2 STARS -- tree preservation ordinance of 2015 protects/preserves trees for
new commercial, industrial, multiple family, and institutional development
16.6 @ 2 STARS – city only plants native species; recommends boulevard tree
species to residents
17. Stormwater
any one action
YES
17.1 @ 2 STARS -- part of the Bassett Creek WMO, which has adopted MIDS; city in
2018 conforming to MIDS as required
17.4 @ 1 STAR -- replaced its street sweeper with a waterless MacQueen
Equipment model
17.5 @ 2 STARS -- 2015 infrastructure projects include rain gardens, option for
residents to install rain gardens during street reconstruction, 160,000-gallon cistern
to irrigate the nearby ball fields, permeable pavers.
17.6 @ Not Rated we removed this action from the GreenStep program because it
was giving credit for fulfilling regulatory requirements under your NPDES MS4
permit
18. Parks & Trails
any three actions
YES
18.1 @ 1 STAR – good comp plan direction
18.2 @ 1 STAR
18.3 @ 1 STAR -- 11.21 acres/1,000 residents; parks comprise 7.1% of total land use
within the city
18.5 @ 3 STARS – cistern to irrigate the nearby ball fields; 5 Adopt-a-Drains near
city hall in 2021
18.8 @ 1 STAR – large “Adopt a Park" program
19. Surface Water
if state public water: 4; and
one additional action
if no state water: any one action
YES
19.2 @ 2 STARS – member, Bassett Creek, Shingle Creek WMO; partnered with
Metro Blooms to host workshops; 2 neighborhood meetings; close work with
Friends of Northwood Lake Association and the Bassett Creek Watershed
Management Commission
19.3 @ 2 STARS – est: Northwood Lake stormwater improvement project will result
in an average annual phosphorous removal of 39%, or 30.48 pounds
19.4 @ 2 STARS -- shoreland permit overlay district, boundaries of which consist of
the first tier of riparian lots abutting a protected water body
19.5 @ 2 STARS -- public service program to restore native plants, trees, and shrubs
along the shoreline in Meadow Lake Park
19.6 @ Not Rated TMDL est. for Meadow Lake; 2021 TMDL for Northwood Lake
20. Water / Wastewater
1 & 2; and one additional
NO
20.2 @ Not Rated - PW checks efficiency of collection systems and lift stations on a
regular basis
20.3 @ 1 STAR -- $300,000 for I&I in 2016, and an increase of $25,000 per year
thereafter
20.6 @ Not Rated - rain water storage tank at Northwood Lake reported under
17.5
20.7 @ 1 STAR -- $4.05/1-10K gal, $4.40/10-20K gal, $4.95/20K+ gal; commercial
$4.15/1K gal
21. Septics
any one action
22. Solid Waste
1 or 2; & one from 4-8
YES
22.1 @ 1 STAR – 2019 stretch/shrink plastic wrap collection/recycling program at
city buildings
22.2 @ 2 STARS -- new police station/city hall is equipped with several water bottle
filling stations
22.3 @ 1 STAR – 2017 recycling participation 93%; 520 recycling lbs./household in
2017
22.4 @ 2 STARS -- part of 3-city Hennepin Recycling Group that does annual
collection of products not suitable for weekly garbage collection as well as every-
other-year curbside collection of such goods
22.5 @ 1 STAR -- 1 city licensed hauler offers organics recycling
22.6 @ 1 STAR -- code requires 8-plexes+ to provide recycling services to residents;
majority of businesses are required to recycle; 2018 Neighborhood [self] Organized
Trash Collection Guide
22.7 @ 1 STAR – nice hauler rate sheet
22.8 @ 2 STAR – Participates in County’s pre-demolition inspection program; city
re-use or donation of appliances from city-owned properties.
23. Local Air Quality
any two actions
YES
23.1 @ 1 STAR -- recreational burning guidelines on city web
23.2 @ 1 STAR
23.3 @ 2 STARS -- 2011-2012: city replaced 3 inefficient inspectors vehicles with
energy-efficient Ford Fusions
ECON & COMM DVLP: 3 BPs required; are 3 done?
24. Benchmarks & Involvement
Actions 1 & 2
YES 24.1 @ 1 STAR – GreenStep/sustainability page on city web
24.2 @ 1 STAR -- Performance Measurement Report incl. GS
25. Green Businesses
any two actions
YES
25.2 @ 1 STAR – CEE offerings to businesses
25.5 @ Not Rated - Village on Quebec: city assisted developers with cleanup of the
previously contaminated industrial site
25.7 @ 3 STARS -- city staff led a "Shop New Hope" campaign in 2009 (20,000
coupon books); a Business Directory now maintained
26. Renewable Energy
any two actions
YES 26.2 @ 1 STAR -- CEE residential solar PV loans
26.3 @ 1 STAR -- with CEE: various commercial, non-profit, and rental improvement
programs, loans, commissioning
26.7 @ 1 STAR – 2019 solar energy ordinance providing a clear regulatory path
27. Local Food
any one action
YES 27.2 @ 2 STARS – 2018 pollinator habitat resolution: work toward Bee-Safe City
status; BMPs on city property; educate residents. Bees and fowl allowed by permit
27.3 @ 2 STARS – farmer’s market, community garden, Hope Grows (community-
based org, volunteer board, city-sponsored)
28. Business Synergies
action 2, 3 or 4
NO 28.3 @ Not Rated - 2015 Hy-Vee development located within walking distance of
both transit and residential
29. Climate Adaptation
Action 1
YES 29.1 @ 1 STAR -- part of West Metro Fire-Rescue District (emergency preparedness
coordination agency) 2016 city update of Hazard Mitigation Plan; part of North
Suburban Emergency Planning Group; city manager is EM coord.
NEW HOPE – notable actions
✓ 2019 City Hall/Police Station constructed using Section 179D Energy-Efficient Commercial Building Tax
Deduction program will save approx. $50,932 in energy costs annually, a 4 year pay-back.
✓ Winner of the 2017 LMC/GSC Sustainable City Award for its lake water quality improvements and savings of
over $10,000/yr. from storm water reuse
✓ $96,000 first-year savings in city buildings improved via an energy performance contract
✓ Density bonuses in residential districts for attributes including underground parking, proximity to public
transit, incorporating outdoor play areas in multi-family projects
✓ A detailed complete streets policy
✓ Bicycle parking requirements for commercial land uses
✓ Grocery/prescription delivery options for residents listed on city website
✓ 2015 infrastructure projects include rain gardens, option for residents to install rain gardens during street
reconstruction, cistern to irrigate the nearby ball fields, permeable pavers
✓ 2018 pollinator habitat resolution: work toward Bee-Safe City status
✓ 1st known car wash in the country to utilize system that retains all rainwater on-site for car wash reuse
✓ Neighborhood-Organized Trash Collection Guide developed by City in 2018 to assist residents living in a
contiguous area to jointly hire just one hauler; reduced costs documented by residents
✓ Significant Safe Routes to School work over 10+ years
✓ City staff volunteered to adopt 5 stormdrains near city hall through the Adopt-A-Drain program in 2021.
YES
I:\RFA\COMM DEV\2022\Work Session\01‐18‐22 CDBG Funds\11.4 Q ‐ WS 2022 CDBG Funds 01‐18‐22.docx
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: Community Development
By: Jeff Alger, Community Development Specialist;
Jeff Sargent, Director of Community Development
Agenda Title
Discuss use of 2022 Community Development Block Grant funds
Requested Action
Staff requests that the City Council provide direction on how 2022 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds should be utilized.
Policy/Past Practice
Staff has been directed to target distressed single‐family properties throughout the city, with the goal of
improving residential neighborhoods. The city has coordinated a variety of housing projects that included
both affordable and market‐rate housing and has partnered with organizations such as Habitat for Humanity
in the past.
Background
It is estimated that the city of New Hope will receive $118,091 in CDBG funds in 2022. As was the case in
recent years, 15% of those funds will be distributed for Public Service Activities by Hennepin County. Public
service agencies will apply for the funding directly through Hennepin County, alleviating the need for
individual cities to distribute the grant funds. Funding for public service activities will be awarded through a
single, combined competitive RFP process, covering all the cities in the county CDBG program. HUD limits
the use of CDBG funding for public services to 15%. This leaves the city with approximately $100,377 in
funds to distribute in 2022, up from $90,050 in 2021.
The city has a couple options on how to use the $100,377 in CDBG funds. The two areas the city has historically
dedicated the funds towards include Hennepin County’s home rehab program and the city’s scattered site
housing program. The home rehab program offers deferred loans for home repairs and maintenance to
income‐qualified residents of the city. If the funds were to be used for a scattered site acquisition/rehabilitation
project, the home would need to be sold to an income‐qualified individual or family. The city could pursue
this option on its own or partner with an organization such as Habitat for Humanity.
In 2021, the city allocated all CDBG funds ($90,500) to Hennepin County’s home rehab program. In 2020, the
city allocated $76,250 in CDBG funds to a Habitat for Humanity rehabilitation project that was completed at
8720 47th Avenue North. Some of those funds were remaining from 2019, after learning that CDBG funds
could no longer be used for the acquisition/demolition of structures, and some were from 2020. The remainder
of the funds from 2019 and 2020 (approximately $117,250) were allocated to Hennepin County’s home rehab
program.
Habitat for Humanity has expressed interest in pursuing another project in New Hope in the fall/winter of
2022. The home at 8720 47th Avenue North recently sold to a first‐time homebuyer for $299,000 after $100,000
in improvements. According to Habitat for Humanity, at least $85,000 in city contributions are needed to make
a project feasible.
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.4
Request for Action, Page 2
Currently there are six Hennepin County home rehab loan applications in process and five projects in progress
with a committed balance of $315,000. There is currently an uncommitted balance of $31,000 with 13
individuals on the waitlist. Requested loan amounts for these individuals are unknown, however, the loans
can be up to $30,000 each. Hennepin County charges a 12% administrative fee to process all loans.
Options for the distribution of 2022 funds include the following:
1. Commit $85,000 for Habitat for Humanity project in the fall/winter of 2022 and $15,000 to Hennepin
County’s home rehab loan program.
2. Commit $100,000 to Hennepin County’s home rehab loan program.
3. Commit $50,000 to a future Habitat for Humanity project and $50,000 to Hennepin County’s home
rehab loan program. At least $35,000 in 2023 CDBG funds would need to be committed to a Habitat
for Humanity project.
If the City Council would like to pursue another Habitat for Humanity project, it is recommended that the
entire project be funded at one time, either this year or next year, to ensure CDBG funds are used in a timely
manner. Splitting the funds (third option above) would result in $50,000 not being used for at least one year.
There are risks associated with holding funds, such as an increase in acquisition/rehabilitation costs, a possible
reduction in future CDBG allocations, or not completing a project/utilizing the funds within the required
timeframe.
Affordable Housing Units & Housing Performance Score
A large percentage of New Hope’s housing stock is currently considered “affordable,” although that number
has decreased in recent years. According to the Metropolitan Council, the percentage of affordable units (30%‐
80% AMI) available in the city has decreased from 92% in 2015 (as reported in 2017) to 75% in 2019 (as reported
in 2021).
Affordable Housing in New Hope – 2015
Incomes at or Below: Number of Units % of Total New Hope Housing Units
30% of AMI 630 7%
31‐50% of AMI 1,674 18%
51‐80% of AMI 6,113 67%
Total Affordable Units 8,417 92%
Total New Hope Units 9,129
Source: Metropolitan Council Existing Housing Assessment, New Hope, 2015; published in 2017
Affordable Housing in New Hope – 2019
Incomes at or Below: Number of Units % of Total New Hope Housing Units
30% of AMI 707 8%
31‐50% of AMI 1,337 14%
51‐80% of AMI 5,010 53%
Total Affordable Units 7,054 75%
Total New Hope Units 9,420
Source: Metropolitan Council Existing Housing Assessment, New Hope, 2019; published in 2021
Request for Action, Page 3
The city’s “Housing Performance Score,” as assigned by Metropolitan Council, increased from 86 in 2018 to
90 in 2021 (maximum score is 100). The scoring system assesses and recognizes local efforts in developing and
maintaining housing affordable to low‐ and moderate‐income households through a variety of programs and
services. The score is based on a community’s activities in the following categories:
New affordable or mixed‐income housing completed in the last ten years.
Preservation projects completed in the last seven years and/or substantial rehabilitation projects
completed in the last three years.
Housing policies and ordinances.
Characteristics of the existing housing stock.
The score affects a city’s competitiveness for regionally allocated federal transportation funding and funding
through Livable Communities Grant programs. It is based on information collected through Metropolitan
Council’s Affordable Housing Production Survey. In comparison to the 181 other cities and townships
included in the assessment, New Hope’s 2021 score was higher than 148 other cities, lower than 30 other cities,
and tied with two other cities.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction on how approximately $100,377 in CDBG funds
should be dispersed in 2022.
Attachments
Metropolitan Council 2021 Housing Performance Scores
the SCORE Metropolitan Council | metrocouncil.org/housing/thescore | 1
Housing Performance Scores—the SCORE— assess and recognize local efforts in developing and maintaining housing affordable to
low- and moderate-income households through a variety of programs and services. The 2021 SCORES reflect the policies, activities, and
production of cities and townships in 2020.
SCORES are calculated annually for every city and township in the Twin Cities region. SCORES are based on data provided by Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) and county government, which are then supplemented based on the information collected through an
online survey of regional jurisdictions. The data collected in the survey is useful for understanding how cities are addressing their housing
needs.
For more information about how we use and calculate SCORES, please visit http://metrocouncil.org/housing/theScore.
2021 HOUSING PERFORMANCE SCORES
City/township
SCORE
(9/17/2021)City/township SCORE
(9/17/2021)
Afton 50 Cologne 52
Andover 5 Columbia Heights 2
Anoka 62 Columbus 0
Apple Valley 100 Coon Rapids 100
Arden Hills 10 Corcoran 27
Bayport 26 Cottage Grove 71
Baytown Township 33 Credit River 40
Belle Plaine 71 Crystal 91
Belle Plaine Township 26 Dahlgren Township 24
Benton Township 0 Dayton 30
Bethel 0 Deephaven 26
Birchwood Village 26 Dellwood 34
Blaine 83 Denmark Township 7
Blakeley Township 26 Douglas Township 50
Bloomington 100 Eagan 81
Brooklyn Center 91 East Bethel 3
Brooklyn Park 100 Eden Prairie 99
Burnsville 77 Edina 96
Camden Township 9 Elko New Market 26
Carver 0 Empire Township 29
Castle Rock Township 50 Eureka Township 44
Cedar Lake Township 26 Excelsior 30
Centerville 1 Falcon Heights 5
Champlin 85 Farmington 35
Chanhassen 60 Forest Lake 95
Chaska 100 Fridley 89
Circle Pines 2 Gem Lake 0
Coates 50 Golden Valley 72
City/township
SCORE
(9/17/2021)City/township
SCORE
(9/17/2021)
Grant 50 Marine on St. Croix 24
Greenfield 26 Marshan Township 37
Greenvale Township 26 May Township 0
Greenwood 26 Mayer 52
Grey Cloud Island Township 0 Medicine Lake 26
Ham Lake 2 Medina 30
Hamburg 50 Mendota 26
Hampton 26 Mendota Heights 40
Hampton Township 26 Miesville 26
Hancock Township 0 Minneapolis 100
Hastings 96 Minnetonka 100
Helena Township 26 Minnetonka Beach 26
Hiltop 0 Minnetrista 26
Hollywood Township 0 Mound 57
Hopkins 99 Mounds View 13
Hugo 100 New Brighton 71
Independence 50 New Germany 81
Inver Grove Heights 40 New Hope 90
Jackson Township 26 New Market Township 35
Jordan 26 New Trier 26
Lake Elmo 31 Newport 50
Lake St. Croix Beach 26 Nininger Township 26
Lakeland 50 North Oaks 2
Lakeland Shores 26 North St. Paul 75
Laketown Township 24 Norwood Young America 50
Lakeville 95 Nowthen 18
Landfall 29 Oak Grove 1
Lauderdale 91 Oak Park Heights 54
Lexington 4 Oakdale 68
Lilydale 26 Orono 29
Lino Lakes 44 Osseo 29
Linwood Township 10 Pine Springs 26
Little Canada 9 Plymouth 99
Long Lake 26 Prior Lake 90
Loretto 34 Ramsey 94
Louisville Township 26 Randolph 26
Mahtomedi 83 Randolph Township 26
Maple Grove 91 Ravenna Township 26
Maple Plain 26 Richfield 100
Maplewood 100 Robbinsdale 39
the SCORE Metropolitan Council | metrocouncil.org/housing/thescore | 2
City/township
SCORE
(9/17/2021)City/township
SCORE
(9/17/2021)
Rogers 46 Stillwater 50
Rosemount 87 Stillwater Township 26
Roseville 96 Sunfish Lake 26
San Francisco Township 0 Tonka Bay 26
Sand Creek Township 37 Vadnais Heights 9
Savage 73 Vermillion 26
Scandia 50 Vermillion Township 37
Sciota Township 46 Victoria 68
Shakopee 71 Waconia 96
Shoreview 90 Waconia Township 0
Shorewood 27 Waterford Township 26
South St. Paul 100 Watertown 50
Spring Lake Park 8 Watertown Township 0
Spring Lake Township 27 Wayzata 63
Spring Park 26 West Lakeland Township 5
St. Anthony 32 West St. Paul 100
St. Bonifacius 26 White Bear Lake 93
St. Francis 37 White Bear Township 8
St. Lawrence Township 26 Willernie 26
St. Louis Park 100 Woodbury 100
St. Marys Point 26 Woodland 26
St. Paul 100 Young America Township 0
St. Paul Park 66
the SCORE Metropolitan Council | metrocouncil.org/housing/thescore | 3
I:\RFA\PUBWORKS\2022\Work Session\1‐18 MnDOT muni consent, bury power 42nd, I&I update\RFA Discuss MnDOT muni consent, bury power 42nd, I&I grant update
Facility Expansion
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: Public Works
By: Bernie Weber, Public Works Director
Agenda Title
Discuss Public Works Project Updates
Requested Action
Staff is requesting that the Council receive a presentation by the city engineer regarding several Public
Works projects, including Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) municipal consent,
burying of power on 42nd Avenue between Boone Avenue and US 169, and the City’s application for an
infiltration and inflow grant provided by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
Policy/Past Practice
It is a past practice of Public Works staff to request direction from the City Council on potential upcoming
projects.
Background
MnDOT Municipal Consent
New Hope Public Works and Engineering staff have been meeting with representatives from MnDOT,
Hennepin County, and the City of Plymouth to discuss improvements along 42nd Avenue as a result of the
replacement of the TH 169 / 42nd Avenue (CSAH 9) bridge and interchange. The existing bridge is nearing the
end of its useful life. Staff provided the City Council with an update on this project at past work sessions as
well as talked about other improvements associated with trails, signals, watermain, lighting, and burying of
power. The project was originally planned to be done in 2024, but MnDOT moved up the construction year to
2023. Because right‐of‐way is needed for ADA ramps, MnDOT needs to get municipal consent from the City
of New Hope. MnDOT is requesting the city to pass a resolution for waiver of municipal consent to help meet
the 2023 construction schedule. The city will have costs associated with the signal improvements at
Gettysburg Avenue.
Burying of Power on 42nd Avenue
As part of proposed trails, signals, watermain, and lighting improvements along 42nd Avenue from Boone
Avenue to TH 169, staff has met and worked with Xcel Energy on identifying the costs to bury power in order
to place a new trail along the south side of 42nd Avenue from Boone to Gettysburg Avenue. The trail will
connect to the trail that will be built as part of the new TH 169 bridge and interchange. The cost to bury power
is $727,515.
Infiltration and Inflow Grant
Staff looks for opportunities for grants for various projects. The MPCA started a new planning grant related to
stormwater, wastewater, and community resilience as part of funding approved during the 2021 State
Legislative Session. Staff felt the best chance for receiving funding would be under the wastewater resilience
planning category. A grant of $41,768 plus $4,701 (city match) equals $46,469 for this planning work.
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.5
Funding
Funding for the signal related costs at Gettysburg Avenue will come from the City’s municipal state aid
account. The City and County will split those costs on a 50/50 basis. Funding for the bury of power along 42nd
Avenue from Boone to TH 169 will come from the Street Infrastructure Fund. Funding for the city’s portion of
the I/I grant will come from the sewer fund.
Attachments
January 11, 2022 memo from the City Engineer on these items.
I:\RFA\City Manager\2022\Fin Mgmt Plan\11.6 Q ‐ updated Financial Mgmt Plan 01.18.2022docx.docx
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald
Originating Department: City Manager
By: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Agenda Title
Review updated financial management plan with Abdo
Requested Action
Staff requests that the City Council review and provide feedback on the updated financial management plan
prepared by Abdo. Representatives from Abdo will be in attendance to explain the updated policies. In the
past the Council has approved updates to the plan by consensus at a council work session.
Policy/Past Practice
The city updates policies on an as‐needed basis.
Background
In 2016 a Financial Management Plan was created for the city which encompasses all of the city’s major
financial policies. Updates were made in 2019 and the policies have been reviewed again in 2021. Updates to
the Investment and Purchasing Policies are being recommended.
The city’s investment advisor, PMA Asset Management, LLC, has reviewed the Investment Policy and
suggested language changes to align the policy with current state statutes.
The Purchasing Policy is being updated to set the minimum threshold required for quotations to $5000 and
adjust the amount the city manager has the authority to approve to $20,000 to align with state statutes.
A “red‐lined” version of the policy is attached denoting the changes to the Investment Policy (page #47) and
the Purchasing Policy (page #67), along with a “clean” final updated policy.
Attachments
January 10, 2022 Abdo Memo
June 17, 2019 Excerpt Work Session Minutes re: last policy update
“Red‐lined” Version Updated 2022 Policy
“Clean” Updated 2022 Financial Management Plan Policy
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.6
I:\RFA\City Manager\2022\Federal Funding\WS 011822\11.7 Q ‐ WS Federal Funding Recieved 011822.docx
Request for Action
January 18, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: City Manager
By: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Agenda Title
Discussion regarding federal funding received
Requested Action
Staff and AEM request a discussion with the City Council regarding federal funding received in 2020‐2022.
Policy/Past Practice
The policy and past practice has been for staff to discuss the use of grant funds and recommended fund
transfers with the Council prior to any formal action being requested.
Background
1. CARES Act Funding
As the Council is aware, in 2020 the city received $1,641,664 from the Federal Government’s Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES). When the 2020 audit was completed and accepted in
May, 2021, the general fund had a fund balance in the amount of $1,786,383. The majority of the fund
balance was due to the receipt of the CARES Act funding. The Council agreed that the funding should be
saved for future capital projects and approved a transfer of $1,641,664 from the general fund balance to
the temporary financing fund. It was discussed at that time that the funding could be utilized for
improvements to the public works facility so that bonding was not necessary.
At the May 24, 2021, council meeting the Council approved a contract with Rochon Corporation for
construction of Phase 1 improvements at the public works facility in the amount of $2,316,000. The total
project cost, with indirect costs included, was $2,508,280. The estimated project cost for Phase 2
improvements to be completed in 2024 is $5,767,592. At the June 28, 2021, council meeting the Council
approved a resolution establishing the public works facility fund to pay for the Phase 1 improvements.
The resolution approved transfers into the fund from the central garage fund (building replacement
charges) in the amount of $1,650,000 and from the temporary financing fund (CARES funding) in the
amount of $900,000, for a “start up” facility improvements fund in the amount of $2,550,000. Subsequent
to the project award and establishment of the initial fund, several change orders have been approved and
the unspent bond proceeds from the city hall construction fund in the amount of $400,000 have been
transferred into the fund.
The long‐term financing plan reviewed with the Council at the November work session recommends the
utilization of the CARES Act funding to assist with both Phase 1 and 2 construction improvements to the
public works facility. The original amount of CARES funding transferred into the temporary financing
fund was $1,641,664 and to date only $900,000 has been transferred into the central garage public works
facility fund, leaving a balance of $741,664 yet to be transferred. AEM and staff are recommending that
the remaining CARES funds in the temporary financing fund be transferred to the central garage public
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.7
Request for Action, Page 2
works facility fund to be consistent with the long‐term plan, which shows a $2,041,664 transfer of grant
revenues and unspent bond proceeds ($900,000 CARES + $400,000 bond proceeds + $741,664 CARES =
$2,041,664).
If the Council is in agreement with this transfer, a resolution will be placed on the January 24 council
agenda for formal action.
Attachments
CARES Act Funding
January 13, 2022 AEM Memo
May 24, 2021 Resolution Transferring CARES funds to Temporary Financing Fund
June 28, 2021 RFA and Resolution Establishing Public Works Facility Fund and Approving Transfers
November 8, 2021 Resolution Transferring Unspent Bond Proceeds to Public Works Facility Fund
November 15, 2021 Long‐term Financial Plan Excerpt
2. ARPA Funding
Staff and AEM request to discuss the funding the city received in 2021 from the American Rescue Plan
Act (ARPA), the methodology/report to be submitted to secure the allocation of funds and the future
proposed use of the funds.
The original estimate provided to the city in early 2021 projected that the city would receive a total of
$2,195,235 for 2021 and 2022, or $1,097,615.50 per year. In 2021 New Hope received a total of $1,142,381.88
in ARPA funds, or more than the original one‐year estimate. The city received $1,106,158.24 in July and a
subsequent allocation of $36,223.64 in November (from unclaimed funds).
The city needs to submit a report to the state/federal government by the end of April, 2022, explaining the
methodology the city is utilizing to claim the funds. AEM is recommending that the city utilize the “lost
revenue provision” of the federal guidelines to secure that allocation of the funds. AEM has prepared the
attached revenue loss calculation per standards advised by the Government Finance Officers Association
(GFOA) and determined that the city incurred adequate revenue loss in calendar year 2020 to justify
acceptance of the allocation of ARPA funds. Utilizing the worksheet calculations, AEM feels that the city
can justify $2.5 million in revenue loss. The method recommended by the GFOA is also generally
accepted by the government finance profession and independent auditors. If the Council is in agreement
with this reporting approach, AEM will complete the necessary reporting to advise the state and federal
government justification for receipt of the funds.
Also, in the future the Council should discuss the intended use of the funds. The long‐term plan
recommends that they be utilized for the future improvements at the public works facility so that the
Phase 2 project can be financed internally without bonding. A transfer could be made after acceptance of
the 2021 audit in May, 2022.
Attachments
ARPA Funding
January 13, 2022 AEM ARPA Memo
Revenue Loss Worksheets
Request for Action, Page 3
November 15, 2021 Long‐term Finance Plan Excerpts
RFA’s/Resolutions Accepting ARPA Funds
ARPA Distribution Spreadsheet
LMC ARPA Guidelines