022222 Work Session Meeting Packet
CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION MEETING
New Hope City Hall, 4401 Xylon Avenue North
Northwood Conference Room
Tuesday, February 22, 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 – February 22, 2022
2. ROLL CALL
11. UNFINISHED & ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS
11.1 Discuss professional community‐wide survey in 2022 with Morris Leatherman
Company
11.2 Reaffirm Values and Vision Statement
11.3 Discuss Fair Housing Policy
11.4 Discuss exterior improvement rebate program
11.5 Update from West Metro Fire‐Rescue District
11.6 Discuss process regarding city manager position vacancy
12. OTHER BUSINESS
13. ADJOURNMENT
I:\RFA\City Manager\2022\Performance Measures Program\WS 2‐22‐22 Morris Leatherman\11.1 Q ‐ Morris Leatherman Survey RFA 2022 WS.docx
Request for Action
February 22, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: City Manager
By: Brandon Bell, CD Coord/Management Analyst
and Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Agenda Title
Discuss professional community wide survey in 2022 with Morris Leatherman Company
Requested Action
Staff requests to discuss conducting a professional community wide survey in 2022 utilizing the services of
the Morris Leatherman Company. Peter Leatherman, Vice President of the Morris Leatherman Company,
will be in attendance at the work session to discuss their proposal, discuss survey questions, and respond to
questions from the Council.
Policy/Past Practice
In the past years the city has conducted a professional community wide survey every ten years since 1995,
with the most recent survey being conducted in 2015. In 2015 the City Council concluded that it would be
advantageous for the city to start conducting the professional community wide survey once every five years
instead of ten. The professional survey scheduled to be conducted in 2020 was delayed in 2020 and 2021 due
to the COVID‐19 pandemic. The cities of Golden Valley and Crystal have completed surveys in the last several
years utilizing the services of this firm.
Background
Conducting a professional community wide survey is identified as a potential initiative in the 2022 budget
narrative and the City Manager’s goals. The survey was discussed during the 2022 budget discussions and
there are funds budgeted in the EDA budget to pay for the survey. The professional community wide
survey was delayed in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. In 2015, the survey consisted of
approximately 134 questions and was placed via random phone conversations with 400 residents at a cost of
roughly $20,500. Staff contacted Morris Leatherman to inquire about their rates for a 2022 survey. They
indicated that the cost of another 134‐question survey, like was done in 2015, would not exceed $24,000.
Over the past several years, the city has participated in the state’s performance measurement program
which is based on a combination of survey questions and performance measurement statistics such as: fire
response time, number of sewer backups, etc. The city receives approximately $3,000 reimbursement for
participation in the program. The City Clerk has confirmed with the state that a professional survey would
qualify for the survey question portion of the program, so the city would not be distributing a performance
measurement survey in 2022. Staff would be submitting the base performance measures to the state along
with the responses to the professional survey questions, and would be eligible for the reimbursement from
the state.
While the feedback from the performance measurement survey is valuable, it is not very statistically
accurate. The feedback from a professionally conducted survey is much more accurate and provides great
feedback about city programs, projects and facilities.
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.1
Request for Action, Page 2
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council provide feedback to Morris Leatherman on specific questions you want to
include in the 2022 survey. Some of the questions included in the 2015 survey regarding replacement of the
City Hall and pool facility are no longer relevant. Staff is suggesting the Council way want to consider a
question regarding residents’ interest in organized garbage collection again, similar to the question asked in
the 2015 Morris Leatherman survey. In the written comments on the 2021 city services survey, residents
advocating for city‐wide organized collection was one of the most commonly mentioned subjects.
Attachments
2015 community wide survey with feedback from residents‐edited for changes to 2022
2021 New Hope City Services Survey
2019, 2020, 2021 Performance Table
Text = Discuss if you would like to ask this question again
Text = Recommended for deletion/no longer relevant
THE MORRIS LEATHERMAN COMPANY CITY OF NEW HOPE
3128 Dean Court RESIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 FINAL JULY 2015
Hello, I'm __________ of the Morris Leatherman Company, a
nationwide polling firm located in Minneapolis. We've been
retained by the City of New Hope to speak with a random sample of
residents about issues facing the city. The survey is being taken
because your city representatives and staff are interested in your
opinions and suggestions. I want to assure you that all
individual responses will be held strictly confidential; only
summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NOT PAUSE)
1. Approximately how many years LESS THAN TWO YEARS.....6%
have you lived in New Hope? TWO TO FIVE YEARS......14%
5.1 TO TEN YEARS.......18%
10.1 TO TWENTY YRS.....23%
20.1 TO THIRTY YRS.....18%
OVER THIRTY YEARS......22%
REFUSED.................0%
2. What do you like MOST, if any- DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
thing, about living in New Hope? CONVENIENT LOCATION....13%
HOUSING/NEIGHBORHOOD...21%
PARKS/TRAILS............5%
SMALL TOWN FEEL........21%
QUIET AND PEACEFUL.....18%
FRIENDLY PEOPLE........11%
CLOSE TO JOB............6%
SCATTERED...............5%
3. What do you think is the most DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......7%
serious issue facing New Hope NOTHING................34%
today? REDEVELOPMENT...........7%
RISING CRIME............9%
HIGH TAXES..............4%
STREET MAINTENANCE.....14%
GROWTH..................8%
DIVERSITY...............7%
POOR SPENDING...........5%
SCATTERED...............5%
4. How would you rate the quality of EXCELLENT..............30%
life in New Hope -- excellent, GOOD...................68%
good, only fair, or poor? ONLY FAIR...............2%
POOR....................0%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
5. How would you rate the City of EXCELLENT..............32%
New Hope as a place to raise GOOD...................60%
children -- excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR...............7%
fair or poor? POOR....................1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
6. And, how would you rate New Hope EXCELLENT..............23%
as a place to retire -- excellent, GOOD...................60%
good, only fair, or poor? ONLY FAIR...............9%
POOR....................1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......7%
7. How would you rate the general EXCELLENT..............27%
sense of community among New Hope GOOD...................64%
residents -- excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR...............8%
fair or poor? POOR....................1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
8. All in all, do you think things in RIGHT DIRECTION........92%
New Hope are generally headed in WRONG TRACK.............6%
the right direction, or do you DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......2%
feel things are off on the wrong
track?
IF “WRONG TRACK,” ASK: (N=22)
9. Could you tell me why you feel that way?
TOO MUCH DEVELOPMENT, 18%; RISING CRIME, 27%; GROWING
DIVERSITY, 9%; DECLINING SCHOOL QUALITY, 9%; LACK OF
BUSINESS, 14%; HIGH TAXES, 20%; SCATTERED, 4%.
I would like to read you a list of a few city services. For each
one, please tell me whether you would rate the quality of the
service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
EXC GOO FAI POO DKR
10. Police protection? 40% 51% 8% 1% 1%
11. Fire protection? 43% 49% 5% 0% 3%
12. Building inspection? 13% 56% 11% 1% 20%
13. Sanitary sewer service? 15% 67% 8% 1% 9%
14. Accommodation and control of
storm water run-off? 25% 54% 13% 0% 8%
15. Animal control? 25% 59% 12% 1% 4%
16. Park maintenance? 36% 54% 7% 1% 3%
17. Condition of trails? 28% 54% 9% 1% 9%
EXC GOO FAI POO DKR
18. Recreational programs? 20% 65% 5% 1% 10%
19. Street lighting? 17% 60% 22% 1% 0%
20. Recycling service? 27% 65% 5% 0% 3%
21. Taste and quality of drinking
water? 16% 65% 18% 1% 1%
Roadways in the City of New Hope consist of both city and county
streets and state highways. The county maintains 42nd Avenue, Bass
Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue, while the state maintain Highway
169. Now, for the next two city services, please consider only
city-maintained street and roads. How would you rate....
EXC GOO FAI POO DKR
22. Pavement repair and patching
on city streets? 13% 57% 22% 9% 0%
23. Snowplowing of city streets? 28% 60% 12% 1% 0%
24. When you consider the property EXCELLENT..............17%
taxes you pay and the quality of GOOD...................70%
city services you receive, would ONLY FAIR...............9%
you rate the general value of city POOR....................1%
services as excellent, good, only DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......2%
fair, or poor?
25. Would you favor or oppose an in- FAVOR..................65%
crease in city property taxes, OPPOSE.................29%
if it were needed to maintain DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......6%
city services at their current
level?
IF “OPPOSE,” ASK: (N=116)
26. What services would you be DON’T KNOW/REFUSED.....28%
willing to see cut? NONE/CUT WASTE.........54%
ADMINISTRATION..........6%
PARKS/RECREATION........8%
PUBLIC WORKS............4%
In 2015, the city of New Hope changed to a street improvement
plan, focusing on less expensive “mill and overlay” improvements,
to improve the driving and the appearance of the street, rather
than full reconstruction and utility replacement. This new
approach makes it possible for the city to make improvements to
ten or more miles of city streets each construction year, rather
than one or two miles if the streets were fully reconstructed and
the utilities were replaced.
27. Do you support or oppose this STRONGLY SUPPORT......13%
plan? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do SUPPORT...............61%
you feel strongly that way? OPPOSE................17%
STRONGLY OPPOSE........3%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED.....6%
IF “STRONGLY SUPPORT” OR “SUPPORT,” ASK: (N=295)
28. Would you support a property YES...................71%
tax increase to increase the NO....................25%
number of miles that can be DON’T KNOW/REFUSED.....4%
completed during a construc-
tion year?
Most communities have one of two systems for garbage collection.
In an open collection system, which the City of New Hope currently
has, residents choose their hauler from several different
companies serving the community. Other cities use an organized
collection system, where the City contracts with a hauler or
haulers for collection throughout the city.
29. Would you favor or oppose the City STRONGLY FAVOR.........15%
of New Hope changing from the FAVOR..................37%
current system in which residents OPPOSE.................25%
may choose from several different STRONGLY OPPOSE........10%
haulers to a system where the City DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....13%
chooses a specific hauler or
haulers for the whole community?
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel
strongly that way?
IF A RESPONSE IS GIVEN, ASK: (N=347)
30. Could you tell me one or two DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
reasons for your decision? WANT CHOICE............32%
LIKE CURRENT HAULER....18%
CHOICE/COST LESS........5%
ORGANIZED/COST LESS....14%
ORGANIZED/LESS TRUCKS..20%
ORGANIZED/STREETS......11%
SCATTERED...............1%
IF “OPPOSE” OR “STRONGLY OPPOSE,” ASK: (N=147)
31. Would you still oppose if YES....................42%
changing to an organized sys- NO.....................49%
tem would reduce truck traf- DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......9%
fic in neighborhoods and save
the city money on street re-
pair and maintenance?
Moving on....
32. Other than voting, do you feel YES....................65%
that if you wanted to, you could NO.....................27%
have a say about the way the City DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......8%
of New Hope runs things?
33. How much do you feel you know GREAT DEAL..............9%
about the work of the Mayor and FAIR AMOUNT............52%
City Council -- a great deal, a VERY LITTLE............38%
fair amount, or very little? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
34. From what you know, do you ap- STRONGLY APPROVE.......21%
prove or disapprove of the job SOMEWHAT APPROVE.......62%
the Mayor and City Council are SOMEWHAT DISAPPROVE....10%
doing? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And do STRONGLY DISAPPROVE.....2%
you feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......6%
35. How much first-hand contact have QUITE A LOT.............7%
you had with New Hope City SOME...................40%
staff -- quite a lot, some, very VERY LITTLE............34%
little, or none at all? NONE AT ALL............19%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
36. From your experience, how would EXCELLENT..............14%
you rate the job performance of GOOD...................66%
New Hope City staff – excel- ONLY FAIR..............12%
lent, good, only fair or poor? POOR....................2%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......7%
37. During the past year, have you IN-PERSON..............11%
visited or contacted New Hope TELEPHONE..............18%
City Hall in person, or on the NO.....................71%
telephone? DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
IF "IN-PERSON” OR “TELEPHONE," ASK: (N=114)
38. On your last contact with the POLICE DEPARTMENT......12%
City, which Department did FIRE DEPARTMENT.........4%
you contact -- the Police De- PUBLIC WORKS...........16%
partment, Fire Department, PARK AND RECREATION....11%
Public Works, Parks and BUILDING INSPECTIONS....8%
Recreation, Building Inspec- PLANNING................2%
tions, Planning, Finance De- ADMINISTRATION..........5%
partment, General Information,FINANCE DEPARTMENT......1%
Licenses and Permits or GENERAL INFORMATION....20%
Utility Billing? LICENSE PERMITS.........4%
UTILITY BILLING........15%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......2%
Thinking about your last contact with the City, for
each of the following characteristics, please rate the
service as excellent, good, only fair, or poor....
EXC GOO FAI POO DKR
39. Waiting time for a staff
member to assist you? 33% 56% 10% 1% 0%
40. Courtesy of the City Staff? 44% 48% 6% 2% 0%
41. Ease of obtaining the service
you needed? 38% 45% 11% 6% 0%
New Hope's City Hall and Police Department are forty-six years old
and have been remodeled three times. A consultant that specializes
in municipal facilities and a citizen task force are currently
evaluating New Hope's existing police and City Hall facilities.
The consultant estimates it would cost about $17 million to
correct deficiencies in the current building, as well as adding
space to meet Police Department needs, or approximately $18
million to construct a new Police and City Hall facility.
42. Would you support remodeling or STRONGLY SUPPORT.......15%
replacement of the current Police SUPPORT................46%
and City Hall facilities if the OPPOSE.................21%
City Council, with advice from the STRONGLY OPPOSE.........8%
citizen task force, determine that DON’T KNOW/REFUSED.....11%
it is necessary? (WAIT FOR RE-
SPONSE) Do you feel strongly that
way?
The cost for a new or remodeled municipal building would be a
property tax increase of about $10.50 per month or $126 a year for
an average home in New Hope.
43. Would you support a property tax STRONGLY SUPPORT.......15%
increase to pay for these building SUPPORT................44%
improvements? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) OPPOSE.................22%
Do you feel strongly that way? STRONGLY OPPOSE........11%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......8%
Thinking about your neighborhood for a moment....
44. How would you rate the overall EXCELLENT..............28%
general appearance of your nei- GOOD...................66%
ghborhood -- excellent, good, only ONLY FAIR...............5%
fair, or poor? POOR....................1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
IF "ONLY FAIR" OR "POOR," ASK: (N=25)
45. Why do you feel that way?
ROAD CONSTRUCTION, 16%; MESSY YARDS, 24%; LITTER, 16%;
VACANT HOMES, 12%; JUNK CARS, 24%; RUNDOWN PROPERTIES,
8%;
46. Do you feel the City is too tough, TOO TOUGH...............1%
about right, or not tough enough ABOUT RIGHT............82%
in enforcing the City Code on such NOT TOUGH ENOUGH.......14%
nuisances as animal control, gar- DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......4%
bage disposal, junk cars, messy
yards, and noise?
IF "TOO TOUGH” OR "NOT TOUGH ENOUGH," ASK: (N=58)
47. Could you tell me one or two reasons why you feel that
way?
MESSY YARDS, 19%; LOOSE ANIMALS, 7%; BARKING DOGS,
17%; TALL GRASS, 17%; LOUD NEIGHBORS, 9%; JUNK CARS,
9%; GARBAGE CANS LEFT OUT, 7%; LOUD MUSIC IN CARS, 3%;
RUNDOWN PROPERTIES, 3%; SCATTERED, 9%.
I would like to read you a list of characteristics of a community.
For each one, please tell me if you think New Hope currently
has too many or too much, too few or too little, or about the
right amount. (ROTATE LIST)
MANY FEW/ ABOUT D.K./
MUCH LITT RIGHT REF.
48. Apartments? 32% 12% 55% 1%
49. Starter homes? 8% 21% 69% 3%
50. Move-up housing? 7% 19% 71% 4%
51. Condominiums and townhouses? 19% 17% 62% 2%
52. Affordable housing, defined by
the Metropolitan Council as a
single family home costing less
than $177,500? 9% 24% 64% 4%
53. Assisted living for seniors? 6% 23% 63% 8%
54. Nursing homes? 5% 21% 67% 7%
55. One-level housing for seniors
maintained by an association? 4% 19% 67% 9%
56. Parks and open spaces? 4% 9% 86% 2%
57. Trails and bikeways? 3% 13% 80% 5%
58. Service and retail establishments? 4% 34% 60% 3%
59. Entertainment opportunities? 3% 34% 59% 5%
60. Fine dining restaurants? 3% 34% 60% 4%
61. Family sit-down restaurants? 3% 29% 65% 3%
62. Are there any types of development you would like to see in
the city? (IF "YES," ASK:) What are they? (PROBE)
NONE, 16%; STARTER HOMES, 4%; MOVE-UP HOUSING, 3%;
CONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHOUSES, 4%; AFFORDABLE HOUSING, 2%;
ASSISTED LIVING, 7%; NURSING HOMES, 3%; PARKS/OPEN SPACE,
2%; RETAIL, 25%; ENTERTAINMENT, 10%; FINE DINING, 7%;
FAMILY DINING, 8%; BARS/CLUBS, 2%; RECREATION FACILITIES,
4%; SCATTERED, 3%.
63. Are there any types of development you would strongly op-
pose? (PROBE)
NONE, 46%; APARTMENTS, 20%; CONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHOUSES, 5%;
NURSING HOMES, 2%; RETAIL, 3%; LOW INCOME HOUSING, 6%;
BARS/CLUBS, 7%; SCATTERED, 11%.
As the City of New Hope continues development and redevelop-
ment....
64. Do you support or oppose the City STRONGLY SUPPORT.......17%
providing financial incentives to SUPPORT................60%
attract specific types of develop- OPPOSE.................12%
ment? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you STRONGLY OPPOSE.........6%
feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......6%
I would like to ask about a specific redevelopment sites....
Discussions are underway about potential redevelopment of the
shopping center on the southwest corner of Winnetka and 45th
avenues, just east of Hy-Vee.
For each of the following types of development, please tell me if
you would strongly support it, support, oppose or strongly oppose
it. (ROTATE)
STS SUP OPP STO DKR
65. High-density residential, such as
townhouses or apartments? 11% 33% 29% 27% 1%
66. Retail stores? 34% 49% 11% 5% 1%
67. Medical office space? 26% 49% 17% 8% 1%
68. Senior housing? 18% 45% 21% 14% 3%
The second redevelopment is the site the city purchased and
demolished the apartment complex adjacent to the golf course, on
the northeast corner of Bass Lake Road and Yukon avenues.
69. Are you familiar with this site? YES....................66%
NO.....................34%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
IF “YES,” ASK: (N=262)
For each of the following types of development, please tell me if
you would strongly support it, support, oppose or strongly oppose
it. (ROTATE)
STS SUP OPP STO DKR
70. A sports dome? 19% 34% 26% 19% 3%
71. High-end single family homes? 19% 32% 21% 27% 1%
72. Senior housing? 14% 42% 22% 20% 2%
73. High-end apartments? 10% 21% 33% 34% 2%
Continuing....
The City of New Hope has continued to purchase deteriorating and
blighted properties, demolish them and resell the lots for new
home construction.
74. Do you favor or oppose the City STRONGLY FAVOR.........17%
purchasing deteriorating and FAVOR..................65%
blighted properties for redevelop- OPPOSE..................8%
ment? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) Do you STRONGLY OPPOSE.........5%
feel strongly that way? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......6%
75. Have you done any remodeling or YES....................27%
home improvements in the past five NO.....................73%
years? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
IF "YES," ASK: (N=109)
76. What remodeling or home im- DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
provements have you under- KITCHEN................20%
taken? BATHROOM...............13%
FINISHED BASEMENT......17%
WINDOWS/DOORS..........13%
ROOF...................13%
DECK/LANDSCAPING.......16%
INSULATION..............3%
SIDING..................3%
SCATTERED...............2%
Moving on...
77. During the past two years, has INCREASED..............21%
crime increased, decreased, or DECREASED...............5%
remained about the same in your REMAINED ABOUT SAME....73%
area of the city? DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
78. Do you generally feel safe YES....................94%
walking in your neighborhood alone NO......................5%
at night? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
IF "NO," ASK: (N=19)
79. In which areas do you not feel safe?
REFUSED, 5%; EVERYWHERE, 21%; PARKS, 16%; SIDE STREETS,
11%; MY NEIGHBORHOOD, 32%; MAJOR STREETS, 16%.
80. What makes you feel unsafe?
REFUSED, 5%; RISING CRIME, 26%; DRUGS, 5%; NO PEOPLE
AROUND, 5%; LOITERING PEOPLE, 48%; UNRULY PEOPLE, 5%;
DON’T KNOW NEIGHBORS, 5%.
81. During the past twelve months, YES....................12%
were you or a member of your NO.....................88%
household been the victim of a DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
crime in New Hope?
82. Are you a member of a Neighborhood YES....................16%
Watch? NO.....................83%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
I would like to read you a short list of public safety concerns.
83. Please tell me which one you consider to be the greatest
concern in New Hope? If you feel that none of these problems
are serious in New Hope, just say so. (ROTATE AND READ LIST)
VIOLENT CRIME...............................3%
TRAFFIC SPEEDING...........................25%
DRUGS......................................19%
YOUTH CRIMES AND VANDALISM.................22%
BUSINESS CRIMES, SUCH AS SHOPLIFTING
AND CHECK FRAUD........................5%
RESIDENTIAL CRIMES, SUCH AS BURGLARY
AND THEFT..............................6%
IDENTITY THEFT..............................1%
ALL EQUALLY.................................2%
NONE OF THE ABOVE..........................13%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED..........................5%
84. Is speeding in your neighborhood YES....................32%
a serious traffic problem? NO.....................68%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
85. Are stop sign and traffic signal YES....................31%
violations a serious problem in NO.....................69%
your neighborhood? DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
Continuing....
86. Do you leave the City of New Hope YES....................37%
on a regular or daily basis to go NO.....................38%
to work? NOT EMPLOYED/RETIRED...25%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
IF "YES," ASK: (N=151)
87. In what city is your job DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
located? MINNEAPOLIS............24%
SAINT PAUL.............19%
MINNETONKA..............2%
PLYMOUTH................9%
MAPLE GROVE............17%
BLOOMINGTON.............4%
CRYSTAL................13%
GOLDEN VALLEY...........4%
HOPKINS.................2%
SCATTERED...............5%
88. How many minutes does it take FIVE MINUTES OR LESS....1%
you to get to work? SIX TO TEN MINUTES.....13%
11 TO 15 MINUTES.......25%
16 TO 20 MINUTES.......23%
21 TO 25 MINUTES.......10%
26 TO 30 MINUTES.......13%
OVER 30 MINUTES........15%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
89. How would you rate the ease EXCELLENT..............15%
of getting to and from work GOOD...................76%
-- excellent, good, only fair ONLY FAIR...............7%
or poor? POOR....................1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
90. Do you or anyone in your YES....................17%
household ride public transit NO.....................82%
on a regular basis? DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
IF “NO,” ASK: (N=123)
91. Why don’t you use public DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
transit? NEED CAR...............10%
PREFER TO DRIVE........69%
UNSAFE..................2%
INCONVENIENT...........15%
DOESN’T GO WHERE NEED...3%
SCATTERED...............2%
92. How would you rate the ease of EXCELLENT..............15%
getting from place to place within GOOD...................75%
the City of New Hope – excellent, ONLY FAIR...............9%
good, only fair or poor? POOR....................1%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
Turning to parks and recreation....
93. How would you rate park and rec- EXCELLENT..............21%
reation facilities in New Hope GOOD...................69%
– excellent, good, only fair or ONLY FAIR...............9%
or poor? POOR....................1%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
The New Hope Park and Recreation system is composed of larger
community parks and smaller neighborhood parks, community
ballfields, the New Hope Outdoor Theater, the New Hope Swimming
Pool, the Ice Arena, New Hope community gyms, the Golf Course and
trails. For each of the following facilities, first, tell me if
you or members of your household have used it during the past
year. Then, for those you have used, please rate them as
excellent, good, only fair or poor. If you have no opinion, just
say so....
NOT EXC GOO FAI POO DKR
94. City parks? 19% 35% 43% 4% 0% 0%
95. Community ballfields? 41% 19% 34% 4% 2% 0%
96. New Hope Outdoor Theater? 42% 20% 32% 5% 0% 1%
97. New Hope Swimming Pool? 45% 10% 22% 17% 5% 2%
98. New Hope Ice Arena? 58% 15% 18% 5% 1% 4%
99. New Hope Village Golf Course? 47% 20% 27% 4% 0% 3%
100. Trails? 24% 20% 48% 7% 0% 2%
101. New Hope Community Gyms
101. Have you or members of your house- YES....................23%
hold participated in any city NO.....................77%
sponsored recreational programs DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
during the past year?
IF "YES," ASK: (N=91)
102. Which ones? DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
BASEBALL/SOFTBALL.......9%
BASKETBALL..............4%
ADULT SPORTS...........13%
YOUTH SPORTS...........53%
YOUTH ENRICHMENTPROGRAMS........4%
SWIMMING...............13%
SCATTERED...............3%
ADULT TRIPS
ADULT PROGRAMS
103. Were you satisfied or dis- SATISFIED..............98%
satisfied with your exper- DISSATISFIED............2%
ience? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
104. Does the current mix of recrea- YES....................92%
tional programming in the city NO......................2%
adequately meet the needs of your DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......6%
household?
IF “NO,” ASK: (N=8)
105. What additional recreational programs would you like
to see offered?
FITNESS, 13%; PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS, 25%; DISABLED, 13%;
SENIOR, 13%; TEEN, 25%; ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS,
13%.
106. How likely would you or members of VERY LIKELY............10%
your household be to use trails SOMEWHAT LIKELY........38%
during the winter if they were NOT TOO LIKELY.........21%
plowed – would you be very likely, NOT AT ALL LIKELY......31%
somewhat likely, not too likely, DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
or not at all likely?
The city’s outdoor swimming pool is over fifty years old. The
pool needs extensive repair and maintenance. The cost to replace
the swimming pool would be about five million dollars.
107. Do you support or oppose replacing STRONGLY SUPPORT......18%
the outdoor pool? (WAIT FOR RE- SUPPORT...............41%
SPONSE) Do you feel strongly that OPPOSE................25%
way? STRONGLY OPPOSE........8%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED.....8%
IF “STRONGLY SUPPORT” OR “SUPPORT,” ASK: (N=236)
108. Would you support a property YES...................84%
tax increase for this pur- NO....................11%
pose? DON’T KNOW/REFUSED.....6%
Moving on....
109. What is your primary source of in- DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
formation about city government NOTHING.................5%
and its activities? CITY NEWSLETTER........39%
LOCAL NEWSPAPER........29%
CABLE TELEVISION........7%
CITY WEBSITE............9%
WORD OF MOUTH...........6%
STAR TRIBUNE............3%
PIPELINE INSERT.........3%
110. How would you prefer to receive DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
information from the city? NOTHING.................3%
CITY NEWSLETTER........48%
LOCAL NEWSPAPER........23%
CABLE TELEVISION........6%
CITY WEBSITE...........11%
WORD OF MOUTH...........3%
STAR TRIBUNE............2%
E-MAIL..................2%
PIPELINE INSERT.........3%
The City publishes a newsletter, which is mailed to all residents.
111. Do you receive and regularly read NO.....................14%
the City newsletter? (IF “YES,” YES/EXCELLENT..........26%
ASK:) How would you evaluate the YES/GOOD...............58%
newsletter overall – excellent, YES/ONLY FAIR...........3%
good, only fair or poor? YES/POOR................0%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
The City publishes a news brief in utility bills, called “In the
Pipeline.”
112. Do you receive and regularly read NO.....................27%
the news brief? (IF “YES, YES/EXCELLENT..........22%
ASK:) How would you evaluate the YES/GOOD...............48%
news brief overall – excellent, YES/ONLY FAIR...........3%
good, only fair or poor? YES/POOR................0%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
113. Does your household currently sub- CABLE..................56%
scribe to cable television, satel- SATELLITE..............28%
lite television or neither? NEITHER................15%
DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
IF "CABLE," ASK: (N=225)
As you may know, the City currently cablecasts City Council
and Planning Commission meetings.
114. How often do you watch City FREQUENTLY..............6%
Council or Planning Commis- OCCASIONALLY...........28%
sion meetings -- frequently, RARELY.................22%
occasionally, rarely, or NEVER..................44%
never? DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
115. Have you accessed the City's web- YES....................32%
site? NO.....................68%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
IF "YES," ASK: (N=127)
116. Were you able to find what YES....................96%
you were looking for? NO......................4%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
117. What information were you looking for?
REFUSED, 2%; GENERAL INFORMATION, 13%; CITY EVENTS,
17%; PARKS AND RECREATION, 17%; DEVELOPMENT NEWS, 7%;
CODES AND ORDINANCES, 6%; COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION,
20%; CITY SERVICES, 5%; CRIME STATISTICS, 5%; SCHOOL
INFORMATION, 4%; ROAD CONSTRUCTION, 4%.
The city webstreams its City Council and other public
meetings on its website. Meetings are archived and can
also be viewed anytime after their original airing.
118. Have you ever viewed meetings YES....................27%
from the city's website? NO.....................72%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......1%
119. How interested would you be VERY INTERESTED........12%
in subscribing to receive SOMEWHAT INTERESTED....31%
e-mails containing city in- NOT TOO INTERESTED.....22%
formation and news – very in- NOT AT ALL INTERESTED..31%
terested, somewhat interested,DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......5%
not too interested or not at
all interested?
I would like to ask you about social media sources. For each
one, tell me if you currently use that source of information;
then, for each you currently use, tell me if you would be
likely or unlikely to use it to obtain information about the
City of New Hope.
NOT USE USE DK/
USE LIK NLK REF
120. Facebook? 29% 48% 23% 0%
121. Twitter? 69% 15% 16% 1%
122. Next Door? 70% 19% 9% 2%
123. How would you rate the City's EXCELLENT.............15%
overall performance in communicat- GOOD..................71%
ing key local issues to residents ONLY FAIR.............13%
in its publications, website, POOR...................1%
mailings, and on cable television DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....1%
-- excellent, good, only fair, or
poor?
Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes....
Could you please tell me how many people in each of the following
age groups live in your household. Let's start oldest to young-
est....
124. First, persons 65 or over? 0......................75%
1......................12%
2 OR MORE..............13%
125. Adults under 65? 0......................19%
1......................18%
2......................55%
3 OR MORE...............8%
126. School-aged children or pre- 0......................70%
schoolers? 1......................14%
2......................12%
3 OR MORE...............5%
127. Do you own or rent your present OWN....................59%
residence? RENT...................41%
DON'T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
128. What is your age, please? 18-24...................5%
25-34..................15%
35-44..................19%
45-54..................20%
55-64..................20%
65 AND OVER............21%
129. Which of the following categories WHITE..................70%
represents your ethnicity -- AFRICAN-AMERICAN.......15%
White, African-American, Hispanic- HISPANIC-LATINO.........6%
Latino, Asian-Pacific Islander, ASIAN-PACIFIC ISLANDE...4%
Native American, or something NATIVE AMERICAN.........2%
else? (IF "SOMETHING ELSE," ASK:) SOMETHING ELSE..........4%
What would that be? MIXED/BI-RACIAL.........0%
DON'T KNOW..............0%
REFUSED.................0%
130. What is the primary language REFUSED.................0%
spoken in your home? ENGLISH................94%
SPANISH.................3%
SCATTERED...............3%
131. Does anyone in this household have YES....................19%
a physical limitation that makes NO.....................81%
it difficult to access City ser- DON’T KNOW/REFUSED......0%
vices?
And now, for one final question, keeping in mind that your answers
are held strictly confidential....
132. Is your pre-tax yearly household UNDER $35,000..........19%
income over or under $50,000? $35,000-$50,000........25%
IF "OVER," ASK: $50,001-$75,000........25%
Is it over $75,000? (IF “YES,” $75,000-$100,000.......15%
ASK:) Is it over $100,000? OVER $100,000...........4%
IF "UNDER," ASK: DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.....13%
Is it under $35,000?
133. Gender MALE...................49%
FEMALE.................51%
134. ZONE PRECINCT 1..............9%
PRECINCT 2.............14%
PRECINCT 3.............15%
PRECINCT 4.............15%
PRECINCT 5.............10%
PRECINCT 6..............6%
PRECINCT 7.............18%
PRECINCT 8.............14%
2021 New Hope City Services Survey
You have the option of completing this survey on paper or by visiting newhopemn.gov/survey. If you choose to fill out
the paper version, mail it back to the city with your utility bill or drop it off at New Hope City Hall (either inside or in the
utility drop box) by Oct. 1, 2021. Please submit only one copy of the survey per adult resident, per year. Thank you.
1. How many years have you lived in New Hope?
O 0‐1 Year O 2‐5 Years O 6‐10 Years O 11‐20 Years O More than 20 Years
2. As things now stand, how long in the future do you expect to live in New Hope?
O 0‐1 Year O 2‐5 Years O 6‐10 Years O 11‐20 Years O More than 20 Years
3. How would you rate the overall appearance of the city?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
4. How would you rate the appearance and function of the Civic Center Park, including the new Aquatic Park?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
5. Do you think the city is too tough, about right or not tough enough in enforcing the City Code on such nuisance
issues as trash can screening, exterior storage and inoperable vehicles?
O Too Tough O About Right O Not Tough Enough
6. How would you describe your overall feeling of safety in the city?
O Very Safe O Somewhat Safe O Somewhat Unsafe O Very Unsafe
7. What is your perception of the quality of fire education, inspection and response services provided by West Metro
Fire‐Rescue District?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
8. How would you rate the overall condition of county roads (Winnetka Avenue south of Bass Lake Road, Bass Lake
Road, 42nd Avenue and Medicine Lake Road)?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
9. How would you rate the overall condition of city streets (not including county roads)?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
10. How would you rate the overall quality of snowplowing of city streets?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
11. How likely would you be to use public transit if it was readily available?
O Very Likely O Somewhat Likely O Somewhat Unlikely O Very Unlikely
12. How would you rate the dependability and overall quality of the city sanitary sewer service?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
13. How would you rate the dependability and overall quality of the city water supply?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
‐Over‐
14. How would you rate the overall quality of stormwater management in the city?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
15. How would you rate the overall quality of city recreational programs and facilities (parks, trails, recreation facilities,
classes, etc.)?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
16. How would you rate the quality of communication/distribution of information?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
17. Of these sources, how do you obtain the majority of your city information?
O City Website O City Publications O Social Media O Sun Post/CCX Media
18. If the city offered financial assistance for home repair and improvement projects, would this interest you?
O Yes O No
19. How would you rate the overall quality of services provided by the city?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
20. How do you feel about your opportunities to provide input and feedback about issues of New Hope?
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
21. How do you feel the city reacted to the COVID‐19 pandemic in the following areas?
Overall
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
Parks & Rec
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
Elections
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
Permits and Inspections
O Excellent O Good O Neutral O Fair O Poor
Additional comments or concerns (please print):
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
If you would like someone from the city to contact you about your comments/concerns, please provide your
name and phone number and a staff member will contact you.
Name ____________________________________
Daytime Phone ___________________________
City of New Hope Performance Measures Quantifiable performance measures are shaded and Summaries of Survey Questions are attached Category # Measure Comparison of results between online and paper city services surveys from 2018 (679 responses), 2019 (610 responses) and 2020 (839 responses) General 1. Rating of the overall quality of city services 2019: 20% excellent; 61% good; 12% neutral; 5% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (81% excellent or good) 2020: 20% excellent; 61% good; 10% neutral; 6% fair, 1% poor; 2% don’t know/blank (81% excellent or good) 2021: 18% excellent; 64% good; 12% neutral; 5% fair, 1% poor; 0% don’t know/blank (82% excellent or good) 2. Percent change in the taxable property market value Payable 2019: 7.92% (total taxable market value: $1,831,436,951) Payable 2020: 10.37% (total taxable market value: $2,021,382,123) Payable 2021: 7.72% (total taxable market value: $2,177,389,934) 3. Citizens’ rating of the overall appearance of the city 2019: 15% excellent; 64% good; 9% neutral; 10% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (79% excellent or good) 2020: 15% excellent; 65% good; 11% neutral; 7% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (80% excellent or good) 2021: 16% excellent; 63% good; 11% neutral; 8% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (79% excellent or good) 4. Citizens’ rating of appearance and function of Civic Center Park 2021: 50% excellent; 32% good; 15% neutral; 1% fair, 0% poor; 2% don’t know/blank (82% excellent or good) 5. Bond rating 2019: AA 2020: AA 2021: AA 6. Citizens’ rating of the quality of city recreational programs and facilities 2019: 25% excellent; 49% good; 17% neutral; 7% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (74% excellent or good) 2020: 23% excellent; 49% good; 19% neutral; 5% fair, 1% poor; 2% don’t know/blank (72% excellent or good) 2021: 23% excellent; 52% good; 18% neutral; 4% fair, 2% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (75% excellent or good) 7. Citizens’ rating of opportunity to provide input and feedback about issues 2019: N/A 2020: 15% excellent; 47% good; 24% neutral; 8% fair, 4% poor; 2% don’t know/blank (62% excellent or good) 2021: 14% excellent; 44% good; 29% neutral; 7% fair, 4% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (58% excellent or good)
8. Would use public transit if readily available 2019: 10% very likely; 22% somewhat likely; 26% somewhat unlikely; 42% very unlikely; 0% don’t know/blank (32% very likely or somewhat likely) 2020: 8% very likely; 21% somewhat likely; 24% somewhat unlikely; 46% very unlikely; 2% don’t know/blank (29% very likely or somewhat likely) 2021: 8% very likely; 19% somewhat likely; 26% somewhat unlikely; 47% very unlikely; <1% don’t know/blank (27% very likely or somewhat likely) 9. Citizens’ support of funding home repair and improvement programs 2019: 50% Yes; 48% No; 2% Blank 2020: 51% Yes; 46% No; 3% Blank 2021: 56% Yes; 42% No; 2% Blank Police Services 10. Part I and II crime rates 2018: Part I: 682; Part II: 721 2019: Part I: 611; Part II: 680 2020: Part I: 600; Part II: 503 *Full crime stats for current year compiled after January 1 to ensure accuracy 11. Citizens’ rating of safety in the community 2019: 39% very safe; 54% somewhat safe: 6% somewhat unsafe; <1% very unsafe; <1% don’t know/blank (93% very safe or somewhat safe) 2020: 45% very safe; 47% somewhat safe: 7% somewhat unsafe; 1% very unsafe; <1% don’t know/blank (92% very safe or somewhat safe) 2021: 37% very safe; 51% somewhat safe: 11% somewhat unsafe; 0% very unsafe; <1% don’t know/blank (88% very safe or somewhat safe) 12. Average police response time 2018: 4.36 minutes for priority 1 calls 2019: 4.35 minutes for priority 1 calls 2020: 4.03 minutes for priority 1 calls *Full police stats for current year compiled after January 1 to ensure accuracy Fire & EMS Services 13. Insurance industry rating of fire services 2019: 3 2020: 3 2021: 3 14. Citizens’ rating of the quality of fire protection services 2019: 39% excellent; 41% good; 17% neutral; <1% fair, <1% poor; 2% don’t know/blank (80% excellent or good) 2020: 36% excellent; 42% good; 18% neutral; 1% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (78% excellent or good) 2021: 33% excellent; 43% good; 21% neutral; 1% fair, 0% poor; 2% don’t know/blank (76% excellent or good) 15. Fire calls per 1,000 population 2018: 47.79 (1,097 calls for service, 20,339 pop) 2019: 53.94 (1,097 calls for service, 20,339 pop) 2020: 48.33 (983 calls for service, 20,339 pop) *Full fire stats for current year compiled after January 1 to ensure accuracy Streets 16. Average city pavement condition rating 2019: 76 2020: 80 2021: 81
17. Citizens’ rating of county roads 2019: 8% excellent; 54% good; 15% neutral; 16% fair, 6% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (62% excellent or good) 2020: 5% excellent; 48% good; 18% neutral; 20% fair, 8% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (53% excellent or good) 2021: 10% excellent; 59% good; 15% neutral; 13% fair, 3% poor; 0% don’t know/blank (69% excellent or good) 18. Citizens’ rating of city streets 2019: 9% excellent; 57% good; 14% neutral; 17% fair, 3% poor; <1% don’t know/blank (64% excellent or good) 2020: 6% excellent; 58% good; 17% neutral; 15% fair, 3% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (64% excellent or good) 2021: 9% excellent; 63% good; 15% neutral; 11% fair, 1% poor; <1% don’t know/blank (72% excellent or good) 19. Citizens’ rating of the quality of snowplowing on city streets 2019: 33% excellent; 45% good; 8% neutral; 10% fair, 4% poor; 0% don’t know/blank (78% excellent or good) 2020: 33% excellent; 48% good; 7% neutral; 9% fair, 2% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (81% excellent or good) 2021: 33% excellent; 49% good; 7% neutral; 7% fair, 3% poor; 0% don’t know/blank (82% excellent or good) Water 20. Citizens’ rating of the dependability and quality of city water supply 2019: 39% excellent; 48% good; 8% neutral; 3% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (87% excellent or good) 2020: 41% excellent; 47% good; 7% neutral; 3% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (88% excellent or good) 2021: 37% excellent; 50% good; 8% neutral; 4% fair, 0% poor; <1% don’t know/blank (87% excellent or good) 21. Citizens’ rating of the quality of stormwater management in the city 2019: 20% excellent; 50% good; 20% neutral; 6% fair, 3% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (70% excellent or good) 2020: 19% excellent; 53% good; 19% neutral; 6% fair, 2% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (72% excellent or good) 2021: 24% excellent; 51% good; 17% neutral; 5% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (75% excellent or good) Sanitary Sewer 22. Citizens’ rating of the dependability and quality of city sanitary sewer service 2019: 28% excellent; 53% good; 14% neutral; 3% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (81% excellent or good) 2020: 27% excellent; 53% good; 16% neutral; 2% fair, 1% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (80% excellent or good) 2021: 27% excellent; 56% good; 15% neutral; 2% fair, 0% poor; 0% don’t know/blank (83% excellent or good) 23. Number of sewer blockages on city system per 1000 connections 2019: 1 2020: 2 2021: 0 total as of November 1, 2021
Code Enforcement 24. Citizens’ rating of the quality of code enforcement services 2019: 7% too tough; 58% about right; 34% not tough enough; 1% don’t know/blank 2020: 8% too tough; 63% about right; 28% not tough enough; 1% don’t know/blank 2021: 6% too tough; 62% about right; 31% not tough enough; 1% don’t know/blank Communication 25. Citizens’ rating of the quality of communication/ distribution of information 2019: 17% excellent; 55% good; 16% neutral; 8% fair, 3% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (72% excellent or good) 2020: 18% excellent; 53% good; 16% neutral; 9% fair, 3% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (71% excellent or good) 2021: 20% excellent; 53% good; 18% neutral; 6% fair, 2% poor; 1% don’t know/blank (73% excellent or good) 26. Citizens’ source for city information 2021: 8% city website; 50% city publications; 19% social media; 11% Sun Post/CCX Media; 11% a combination of sources; 1% blank. COVID‐19 27. Citizens’ rating of the city’s reaction to the COVID‐19 Pandemic in several areas. Overall: 22% excellent; 45% good; 24% neutral; 4% fair, <1% poor; 4% don’t know/blank (67% excellent or good) Parks & Recreation: 20% excellent; 40% good; 29% neutral; 4% fair, 2% poor; 5% don’t know/blank (60% excellent or good) Elections: 30% excellent; 41% good; 21% neutral; 4% fair, 2% poor; 3% don’t know/blank (71% excellent or good) Permits & Inspections: 19% excellent; 32% good; 39% neutral; 3% fair, 1% poor; 5% don’t know/blank (51% excellent or good)
I:\RFA\City Manager\2022\Values and Vision\11.2 Q ‐ values statement 02.22.22.docx
Request for Action
February 22, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: City Manager
By: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Agenda Title
Reaffirm Values and Vision Statement
Requested Action
Staff requests Council’s reaffirmation of the city’s Values and Vision Statement.
Background
As part of the state performance measurement program, the Council must reaffirm the values and vision
statement on an annual basis. The statement was last reaffirmed in February of 2021.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council review the city mission, values, vision and strategic goals and reaffirm the
statement.
Attachments
New Hope Values and Vision
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.2
New Hope Values and Vision
City Mission
Strong local government that is proactive in responding to the community needs and issues by delivering quality
public service to all city residents, businesses, property owners, and organizations in a prudent and e cient manner.
Values
Excellence and Quality in the Delivery of Services
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver quality services in a
highly professional and cost-e ective manner.
Fiscal Responsibility
We believe that fi scal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds and city assets is essential if
residents are to have confi dence in government.
Ethics, Integrity and Professionalism
We believe that ethics, integrity, and professionalism are the foundation blocks of public trust and confi dence and
that all meaningful relationships are built on these values.
Respect for the Individual
We believe in the uniqueness of every individual, and welcome, appreciate, and respect diversity and the di ering
of opinions.
Open, Honest, and Respectful Communication
We believe that open, honest, and respectful communication is essential for an informed and involved citizenry
and to foster a positive environment for those interacting with our city.
Cooperation and Teamwork
We believe that the public is best served when all work cooperatively.
Visionary Leadership and Planning
We believe that the very essence of leadership is to be responsive to current goals and needs, and visionary in
planning for the future.
Vision
e city is a great place to grow as a family, individual, or business.
All within our city are safe and secure.
Essential services will be those that promote a safe and healthy environment for all residents.
Essential services and programs will be enhanced and streamlined, and will be provided in an economical manner
and with measurable results.
e city views residents as its greatest asset and seeks their input and participation.
e city will meet the communication needs of citizens, elected o cials, and city sta .
Strategic Goals
e city will maintain and improve its infrastructure (water distribution, storm water, sewer, roads, parks,
lighting, and city facilities).
e city will use frugal spending and resourceful fi nancial management to maintain its fi scal health.
e city will encourage maintenance, redevelopment, and reinvestment of existing properties to improve
or enhance its tax base.
e city will provide core services with a professional sta who are equipped with the necessary tools and
equipment and given necessary direction.
e city will facilitate and improve communications to promote e ective intergovernmental cooperation
between sta , citizens, and Council.
Adopted by the New Hope City Council, August 2006
Reaffirmed by the New Hope City Council, February 2021
I:\RFA\COMM DEV\2022\Work Session\02‐22‐22 Fair Housing Policy\11.3 Q ‐ WS Fair Housing Policy 02‐22‐22.docx
Request for Action
February 22, 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 Fair Housing Policy
Requested Action
Staff requests that the City Council consider implementation of a Fair Housing Policy.
Policy/Past Practice
It is a past practice of staff to research, present options, and make recommendations to the City Council on
policies related to housing in the city.
Background
In recent years several other cities in the area have developed Fair Housing Policies, including Brooklyn Park,
Golden Valley, Plymouth, and St. Louis Park. One of the common goals of the policy throughout other cities
is to ensure that fair and equal housing opportunities are available to all persons in all housing initiatives and
development activities funded by the city regardless of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital
status, status with regard to public assistance, creed, familial status, national origin, or disability. This is
achieved through external practices that provide access to fair housing information and referral services and
through internal practices and procedures that promote fair housing inclusion. Staff has noted that some grant
opportunities require or give preference to cities that have adopted Fair Housing Policies.
Staff has prepared the attached draft Fair Housing Policy for the City Council to review. It designates the
Director of Community Development as the responsible entity for the intake and referral of all fair housing
complaints. It also states that the city will publish information about fair housing on its website. This includes
links to resources such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development and Minnesota Department
of Human Rights, as well as links to state and federal fair housing complaint forms.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council consider implementation of a Fair Housing Policy. If supportive of
the draft policy, staff will prepare a resolution adopting the policy, to be presented at the February 28, 2022,
City Council meeting.
Attachments
Draft Fair Housing Policy
Brooklyn Park Fair Housing Policy
Golden Valley Fair Housing Policy
Plymouth Fair Housing Policy
St. Louis Park Fair Housing Policy
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.3
City of New Hope Fair Housing Policy
I. Purpose & Vision
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing
throughout the United States. The intent of Title VIII is to assure equal housing
opportunities for all citizens. As a recipient of federal community development funds under
Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, the City of New Hope is
obligated to certify that it will affirmatively further fair housing.
The City of New Hope is dedicated to advancing inclusion and equity for all residents by
developing this Fair Housing Policy to further create a safe, healthy, and accessible
community for all residents. It is committed to upholding the federal Fair Housing Act and
the Minnesota Human Rights Act, both of which prevent discriminatory practices in
housing.
II. Policy Statement
It is the policy and commitment of the City of New Hope to ensure that fair and equal
housing opportunities are available to all persons in all housing opportunities and
development activities funded by the city regardless of race, color, religion, sex, sexual
orientation, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, creed, familial status,
national origin, or disability. This is achieved through external practices that provide access
to fair housing information and referral services and through internal practices and
procedures that promote fair housing inclusion.
III. External Practices
a. Intake & Referral
The City of New Hope has designated the Director of Community Development as the
responsible entity for the intake and referral of all fair housing complaints. At a
minimum, the individual will be trained in state and federal fair housing laws, the
complaint process for filing discrimination complaints, and the state and federal
agencies that handle complaints.
The date, time, and nature of the fair housing complaint and the referrals and
information given will be fully documented. The HRA will advise the City Council on
City programs and policies affecting fair housing and address concerns where
appropriate. The HRA may use the information collected to inform their decisions with
respect to programs, policies, issues, and concerns relating to fair housing. The HRA will
not represent or provide legal advice to any members of the public.
b. Meaningful Access
The City of New Hope will have information about fair housing clearly displayed on its
website. This includes links to various fair housing resources, including the Department
of Housing and Urban Development, Minnesota Department of Human Rights, and
others as well as links to state and federal fair housing complaint forms.
c. In-Person Information
The City of New Hope will provide in-person fair housing information, including a list
of fair housing enforcement agencies and fair housing complaint forms for enforcement
agencies.
d. Languages
The HRA will provide information in languages other than English to individuals with
limited English proficiency.
IV. Internal Practices
a. Training
The City of New Hope will train its staff and officials on fair housing considerations.
b. Housing Analysis
The City of New Hope will review its housing stock periodically to examine the
affordability of both rental and owner-occupied housing for the purpose of informing
future action.
c. Code Analysis
The City of New Hope will review its municipal code on a periodic basis, with specific
focus on ordinances related to zoning, building and occupancy standards, to identify
any potential for disparate impact or treatment.
d. Project Planning & Analysis
City planning functions and development review will consider housing issues,
including whether potential projects may perpetuate segregation or lead to
displacement of protected classes.
e. Community Engagement
The City of New Hope will seek input from underrepresented populations in the
community. Conversations regarding fair housing, development, zoning, and land use
changes may be facilitated by the city.
f. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
As a recipient of federal funds, the City of New Hope agrees to participate in the
Regional Analysis of Impediments, as organized by the regional Fair Housing
Implementation Council (FHIC), an ad hoc coalition of Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) entitlement jurisdictions and others working together to affirmatively
further fair housing. The City of New Hope will review the recommendations from the
analysis and, where appropriate, recommend integration into planning documents,
including the Consolidated Plan, the Comprehensive Plan, and other related documents.
DRAFT
City of Brooklyn Park Fair Housing Policy
1. Purpose
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing throughout
the United States. The intent of Title VIII is to ensure equal housing opportunities for all citizens.
As a recipient of federal community development funds under Title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974, the City of Brooklyn Park is obligated to certify that it will
affirmatively further fair housing. The City of Brooklyn Park is committed to meeting this
obligation and has developed this Fair Housing Policy to further that goal.
2. Policy Statement
It is the policy and commitment of the City of Brooklyn Park to ensure that fair and equal
housing opportunities are available to all persons in all housing opportunities and development
activities funded by the City regardless of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital
status, status with regard to public assistance, creed, familial status, national origin, or
disability. This is done through external policies to provide meaningful access to fair housing
information and referral services for all constituents and through internal practices and
procedures that promote fair housing throughout the community.
3. External Practices
a. Intake and Referral
The City of Brooklyn Park designates the Director of Community as the responsible
authority for the intake and referral of all fair housing complaints. At a minimum, the
Director of Community Development will be trained, or will designate Community
Development staff to be trained, in state and federal fair housing laws, the complaint
process for filing discrimination complaints, and the state and federal agencies that
handle complaints. The date, time, and nature of the fair housing complaint and the
referrals and information given will be fully documented. The Director of Community
Development will advise the City Council on programs and policies affecting fair housing
and raise issues and concerns where appropriate.
b. Meaningful Access
i. Online Information: The City will display information about fair housing
prominently on its website. The website will include links to various fair housing
resources, including the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
Minnesota Department of Human Rights, Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid, and others. In
2
addition, the City will link to state and federal fair housing complaint forms and the
State of Minnesota’s Olmstead Plan.
ii. In-Person Information. Upon request, the City of Brooklyn Park will provide in-
person fair housing information including:
o A list of fair housing enforcement agencies;
o Fair housing complaint forms for enforcement agencies; and
o Frequently asked questions regarding fair housing law.
iii. Languages. The City of Brooklyn Park is committed to providing information in
the native language of its residents. Upon request, the City will make reasonable
efforts to provide translation services.
4. Internal Practices
The City of Brooklyn Park commits to the following steps to promote awareness and
competency regarding fair housing issues in all of its government functions.
a. Training: T he City will train its staff and elected officials on fair housing considerations.
b. Housing Analysis: T he City will review its housing inventory periodically to examine
the affordability of both rental and owner-occupied housing to inform future City action.
c. Code Analysis: The City will review its municipal code periodically, with specific focus
on ordinances related to zoning, building and occupancy standards, to identify any
potential for disparate impact or treatment.
d. Project Planning and Analysis: The City planning functions and development review
will consider housing issues, including whether potential projects may perpetuate
segregation or lead to displacement of protected classes.
e. Community Engagement: The City will seek community input, particularly from
underrepresented populations in the community. Conversations regarding fair housing,
development, zoning, and land use changes may be facilitated by the City.
f. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: As a subrecipient of federal funds, the City will,
as requested by Hennepin County as the entitlement jurisdiction, participate in the
Regional Analysis of Impediments, as organized by the regional Fair Housing
Implementation Council (FHIC), an ad hoc coalition of Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) entitlement jurisdictions and others working together to affirmatively
further fair housing. The City will review the recommendations from the analysis for
potential integration into City planning documents, including the Comprehensive Plan
and other applicable documents.
Golden Valley Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Fair Housing Policy
I. Purpose and Vision
It is the policy and commitment of the City of Golden Valley, through its Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, to ensure that fair and equal housing opportunities are available to all persons in all housing
opportunities and development activities funded by the City regardless of race, color, religion,
immigration status, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, status with regard to public
assistance, creed, familial status, national origin, cultural background, age, or disability. Title VIII of the
Civil Rights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing throughout the United States. The
intent of Title VIII is to assure equal housing opportunities for all people.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Golden Valley (the “HRA”) is dedicated
to advancing inclusion and equity for all residents by developing this Fair Housing Policy to further the
goal of creating a safe, healthy, and accessible community where all residents will thrive.
The HRA is also committed to upholding the federal Fair Housing Act and the Minnesota Human Rights
Act, both of which prevent discriminatory practices in housing. As a recipient of federal community
development funds under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, the City,
through its HRA certifies that it will affirmatively further fair housing.
II. External Practices
a. Intake and Referral
The HRA has designated the HRA Director or their designee as the responsible authority for
the intake and referral of all fair housing inquiries. At a minimum, the responsible staff
member will be trained in state and federal fair housing laws, the complaint process for filing
discrimination complaints under state and federal law, and the state and federal agencies that
handle such complaints. The HRA will document the date, time, and nature of the fair housing
inquiries it receives and any referrals or information given in response to such inquires. The
responsible staff person will maintain relevant supporting information according to the HRA’s
Document Retention Schedule. The HRA may use the information collected to inform their
decisions with respect to programs, policies, issues, and concerns relating to fair housing. The
HRA will not represent or provide legal advice to any members of the public.
b. Meaningful Access
i. Online Information
The HRA will clearly display information about fair housing on its website, including the
contact information for relevant HRA staff to receive fair housing inquiries. The website
will include links to various fair housing resources, including the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, Minnesota Department of Human Rights and others as well as
links to state and federal fair housing complaint forms.
ii. In-Person Information
HRA staff will provide in-person fair housing information to community members
including:
• A list of fair housing enforcement agencies;
• Frequently asked questions regarding fair housing law; and
• Fair housing complaint forms for enforcement agencies.
c. Languages
The HRA is committed to providing information in the native language of its community
members. The HRA will provide information in languages other than English to individuals
with limited English proficiency.
III. Internal Practices
The HRA commits to the following steps to promote awareness and competency regarding fair
housing issues in all of its government functions.
a. Training. The HRA will train its staff and officials on fair housing considerations.
b. Housing Analysis. The HRA will review its housing stock periodically to examine the
affordability of both rental and owner-occupied housing to inform future HRA actions.
c. Code Analysis. The HRA will review its municipal code periodically, with specific focus on
ordinances related to zoning, building, and occupancy standards, to identify any potential for
disparate impact or treatment.
d. Project Planning and Analysis. HRA planning functions and development review will consider
housing issues, including whether potential projects may perpetuate segregation or lead to
displacement of protected classes.
e. Community Engagement. The HRA will seek input from underrepresented populations in the
community and the community at large. Conversations regarding fair housing, development,
zoning, and land use changes may be facilitated by the City or the HRA.
f. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. As a recipient of federal funds, the HRA agrees to
participate in the Regional Analysis of Impediments, as organized by the regional Fair Housing
Implementation Council (FHIC), an ad hoc coalition of Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) entitlement jurisdictions and others working together to affirmatively further fair
housing. The HRA will review the recommendations from the analysis and, where appropriate,
recommend integration into City planning documents, including the Consolidated Plan, the
Comprehensive Plan, and other related documents.
g. Fair Housing Review. The HRA will monitor city activities affecting fair housing and raise issues
and concerns where appropriate. The HRA may also expand the list of protected classes of
citizens to be included under its Fair Housing Policy.
Fair Housing Policy
1. Scope of Purpose
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing throughout
the United States. The intent of Title VIII is to assure equal housing opportunities for all
citizens. As a recipient of federal community development funds under Title I of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974, the City of Plymouth is obligated to certify that it
will affirmatively further fair housing.
The City of Plymouth is dedicated to advancing inclusion and equity for all residents by
developing this Fair Housing Policy to further create a safe, healthy, and accessible community
in which to thrive.
2. Policy Statement
It is the policy and commitment of the City of Plymouth to ensure that fair and equal housing
opportunities are achievable for all persons in all housing opportunities and development
activities funded by the city regardless of race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation,
marital status, status with regard to public assistances, familial status, national origin, or
disability. This commitment is upheld through external policies that provide access to all
constituents and fair housing information and referral services; and internal procedures and
practices that promote fair housing and inclusion.
3. External Practices
a. Intake and Referral
The City of Plymouth has designated the Executive Director of the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority as the responsible entity for the intake and referral of all fair
housing complaints. At a minimum, the Executive Director will be trained in state and
federal fair housing laws, the complaint process for filing discrimination complaints, and
the state and federal agencies that handle complaints. The date, time, and nature of
the fair housing complaint and the referrals and information given will be fully
2
documented. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority will advise the City Council on
City programs and policies affecting fair housing and address concerns where
appropriate.
b. Meaningful Access
i. Online Information. The City of Plymouth will have information about
fair housing clearly displayed on its website. The website will continue to
link to various fair housing resources, including the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Minnesota Department of Human
Rights, Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid, Southern Minnesota Regional Legal
Services, and others. The website will also link to state and federal fair
housing complaint forms.
c. In-Person Information. The City of Plymouth will provide fair housing
information to anyone requesting such information at the city offices.
Information provided will include:
i. A list of fair housing enforcement agencies
ii. Frequently asked questions in regards to fair housing law; and
iii. Fair housing complaint forms
d. Languages. The City of Plymouth is committed to providing information in the
native language of its residents. The City of Plymouth will provide information in
languages other than English as described in the Administrative Plan for the
Housing Choice Voucher Program.
3
4. Internal Practices
The City of Plymouth enacts the following to promote awareness and proficiency
regarding fair housing issues in all of its government functions.
a. Training. The City will train its staff and elected officials on fair housing
considerations.
b. Housing Analysis. The City will review its housing on a periodic basis to
determine the affordability of both rental and owner-occupied housing for the
purpose of informing future City action.
c. Code Analysis. The City will review its municipal code on a periodic basis, with
specific focus on ordinances related to zoning, building and occupancy
standards, to identify any potential for disparate impact or treatment.
d. Project Planning and Analysis. City planning functions and development review
will consider housing issues, including whether potential projects may
perpetuate segregation or lead to displacement of protected classes.
e. Community Engagement. The City will seek input from underrepresented
populations in the community. Conversations regarding fair housing,
development, zoning, and land use changes may be facilitated by the City.
f. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. As a recipient of federal funds, the City
agrees to participate in the Regional Analysis of Impediments, as organized by
the regional Fair Housing Implementation Council (FHIC), an ad hoc coalition of
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement jurisdictions and
others working together to affirmatively further fair housing. The City will
review the recommendations from the analysis for potential integration into City
planning documents, including the Consolidated Plan, the Comprehensive Plan,
and other related documents.
Fair Housing Policy
1. Purpose and Vision
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act establishes federal policy for providing fair housing
throughout the United States. The intent of Title VIII is to assure equal housing
opportunities for all citizens. The City of St. Louis Park, as a recipient of federal community
development funds under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974,
is obligated to certify that it will affirmatively further fair housing. The City of St. Louis Park
strives to advance its commitment to racial equity and inclusion by developing this Fair
Housing Policy to further the goal of creating a thriving, safe, and healthy community for all
residents. This policy’s purpose is to outline St. Louis Park’s dedication and response to fair
housing issues which includes designating a fair housing officer, referrals, and resources.
2. Fair Housing Policy Statement
It is the policy and commitment of the City of St. Louis Park to ensure that fair and equal
housing opportunities are available to all persons in all housing opportunities and
development activities funded by the city regardless of race, color, religion, sex, sexual
orientation, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, creed, familial status,
national origin, or disability. This is done through external practices that provide access to
fair housing information and referral services; and through internal practices and procedures
that promote fair housing and support the city’s racial equity and inclusion goals.
3. External Practices
a. Fair Housing Officer
The City of St. Louis Park has designated the Fair Housing Officer to be the staff
liaison to the Human Rights Commission as the responsible authority for the
intake and referral of all fair housing complaints. At a minimum, the Fair Housing
Officer will be trained on the complaint process for filing discrimination
complaints, and the state and federal agencies that handle complaints.
The Fair Housing Officer will work closely with the housing department for
additional support and with organizations in the community. The date, time and
nature of the fair housing complaint and the referrals and information given will
be fully documented. The Fair Housing Officer will inform the Housing
Department of trends, when appropriate, arising from the recording keeping of
fair housing complaints brought to the city.
b. Meaningful Access
i. Online Information. The City of St. Louis Park will continuously have a
space designated for the fair housing policy with additional resources and
information on the city website. The website will include links to various
fair housing resources, including:
1. The Department of Housing and Urban Development
2. Minnesota Department of Human Rights
3. Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid
4. HOME Line
Adopted by the St. Louis Park City Council November 4, 2019
5. State of Minnesota’s Olmstead Plan
6. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Policy
ii. In-Person Information. The City of St. Louis Park will provide in-person
fair housing information including:
1. A list of fair housing enforcement agencies;
2. Frequently asked questions regarding fair housing law; and
3. Fair housing complaint forms for enforcement agencies
c. Languages
The City of St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community. To provide information in the native language of its residents and
better serve our increasingly diverse population, the city contracts with a service
that provides interpretation via telephone. The city will utilize other avenues as
needed to provide interpretation services to its residents.
4. Internal Practices
a. Staff and Officials Training. The city will train its staff and officials on fair housing
considerations.
b. Housing Analysis. The city will prepare its housing activity report annually and
conduct a market housing analysis approximately every five years to examine the
affordability of both rental and owner-occupied housing to inform future city
actions.
c. Code Analysis. The city will review its municipal code at least every 10 years,
with specific focus on ordinances related to zoning, building, and occupancy
standards, to identify any potential for disparate impact or treatment.
d. Project Planning and Analysis. City planning functions and review of
development will examine fair housing impact of development, including
whether potential projects may perpetuate segregation or lead to displacement
of protected classes.
e. Community Engagement. The city is committed to providing resources and
referrals to tenants on fair housing and tenant rights. The city will also educate
rental property owners and managers on fair housing practices and policies. The
city is committed to community engagement and public process and seeks to
gain an understanding of fair housing concerns from impacted residents.
Additional conversations regarding fair housing development, zoning and land
use changes may be facilitated by the city.
f. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. As a recipient of federal funds, the city
agrees to participate in the Regional Analysis of Impediments, as organized by
the regional Fair Housing Implementation Council (FHIC), an ad hoc coalition of
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement jurisdictions and
others working together to affirmatively further fair housing. The City will
review the recommendations from the analysis for potential integration into City
planning documents, including the Consolidated Plan, the Comprehensive Plan,
and other related documents.
I:\RFA\COMM DEV\2022\Work Session\02‐22‐22 Exterior Improvement Rebate Program\11.4 Q ‐ WS Exterior Improvement Rebate Program 02‐22‐22.docx
Request for Action
February 22, 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 exterior improvement rebate program
Requested Action
Staff requests that the City Council consider implementation of an exterior improvement rebate program for
single‐ and two‐family homes. The purpose of the discussion is to present the framework of what an exterior
improvement program might involve and determine if staff should prepare a detailed proposal for the City
Council to review.
Policy/Past Practice
It is a past practice of staff to research, present options, and make recommendations to the City Council on
housing loan/grant programs and the use of Economic Development Authority (EDA) funds. In the past
several City Council members have suggested that staff review housing improvement programs offered in
other cities and make recommendations for additional programs in New Hope.
Background
The city currently offers residents a variety of loans and grants through the Center for Energy and
Environment (CEE) and Hennepin County. This includes low interest home improvement loans and
emergency deferred loans through the CEE and low interest home improvement loans through Hennepin
County. The CEE also offers residents access to several other statewide funding options. In addition to these
programs that are intended to help maintain and improve the city’s housing stock, staff coordinates a robust
scattered site housing program, which has resulted in the construction or rehabilitation of 25 single‐family
homes over the last eight years. During that timeframe, a total of 120 new single‐family homes have been
constructed in the city (average of 15 per year), including the Centra Homes and recently completed Windsor
Ridge developments. There are 4,660 single‐family homes and 286 twin homes in the city.
The last three years, as part of the city services survey, residents have been asked if they would be interested
in financial assistance for home repair and improvement projects if offered by the city. The results are as
follows:
Citizens’ support of funding home repair and improvement programs
Year Yes (Support) No (Oppose) Blank
2019 50% 48% 2%
2020 51% 46% 3%
2021 56% 42% 2%
Staff is requesting that the City Council consider implementation of an exterior improvement rebate program
for single‐ and two‐family homes. The goal of the program could be to encourage homeowners to make
improvements to the exterior of their home, specifically in areas that are visible from the street. Improving the
curbside appeal of properties within the city would aid in improving the overall housing stock, instill
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.4
Request for Action, Page 2
confidence into neighborhoods, and increase home values. Staff believes an exterior improvement rebate
program would complement the city’s existing housing programs and would be a good use of some general
fund surplus and EDA funds. The cities of Blaine, Coon Rapids, and Fridley have implemented “Front Door
Grant Programs” in recent years to incentivize improving the curb appeal of homes. New Hope’s pilot
program could utilize some aspects of these programs with a heavy emphasis on improving the exterior
appearance of a property as opposed to interior remodeling projects or the build‐out of unfinished living
space. Staff has prepared the framework of what an exterior improvement program might involve. The
program could be adjusted after the first year depending on demand and feedback. If the City Council is
supportive of implementing such a program, staff is requesting feedback on the following:
Budget
As outlined in the attached memorandum from Vicki Holthaus, the city’s financial consultant from Abdo is
recommending that the City Council consider allocating $100,000 from the general fund surplus to support
implementation of the program in its first year. Any unused funds from the initial year of the program would
be held over to provide funding in subsequent years. Funds in the EDA reserves could cover the costs of an
exterior improvement rebate program in future years. Staff is recommending allocating $100,000 for the
program in its first year.
Eligible Properties
Owner‐occupied one‐ and two‐family homes with homestead status.
Properties that are current on their property taxes and do not have any outstanding city citations or
past due utility bills.
Properties that have not received funds through the exterior improvement rebate program within the
last five years.
Curbside Appeal Projects
Project(s) must take place on side(s) of the house or garage that abut a street.
Minimum project cost of $4,000; reimbursed at 25% with a maximum rebate of $5,000.
Eligible projects could include:
o Alteration of roofline.
o Addition of covered front porch.
o Front door replacement – new door must feature window(s).
o Storm door installation/replacement – new door must feature window(s).
o Garage door replacement – new door must feature window(s).
o Addition of sidelight (side) and/or fanlight (above) windows around front door.
o Installation of column(s) around front door.
o Addition of brick or stone façade/accents.
o Incorporation of address numbers into stone façade.
o Installation of shutters, shakes, and/or board and batten siding. Improvements can be in
conjunction with installation of other siding, however, only the cost of shutters, shakes, and
board and batten siding will be eligible for a rebate.
o Enlargement or installation of new window(s) – window replacement does not qualify.
o Replacement of Class 5 gravel driveway with asphalt, cement, or brick driveway.
o Replacement of asphalt driveway with cement or brick driveway.
Tools, work by homeowners, and insurance claims not covered by reimbursement.
Request for Action, Page 3
Application
First come, first served until funds are expended for the first year to allow more time to promote the
program and staff the opportunity to process applications as they are received. The city could consider
moving to a fixed deadline in the future to make processing applications and budgeting more
streamlined.
Applications would be processed in a “first come first serve” basis until funds for the year are depleted.
Loans
Loans available through Hennepin County and CEE could be utilized by residents to finance projects.
Reimbursement
Project would need to be completed within 180 days of permit approval.
Property owner would need to provide paid invoices/statements after completion of the project.
Property owners who do work themselves could submit material lists and get paid for material costs
but not labor.
Finance Department would be responsible for issuing reimbursement checks and W‐9s, as
reimbursement must be treated as income.
Building permit fees would not be waived.
Discussion
In addition to requesting feedback on the framework of the program outlined above, if the City Council
supports pursuing an exterior improvement rebate program, staff would specifically like direction on the
following policies:
Should program eligibility be tied to income, home value, or the age of a home?
How much should be allocated to the program?
Other cities have offered rebates for driveway repair or replacement (for existing asphalt or concrete)
and have reported that these are common projects. Other cities have also reimbursed for exterior
painting and permanent landscaping. None are included in the framework being presented by staff,
however, could be added if the City Council is in support.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council consider implementation of an exterior improvement rebate program
for single‐ and two‐family homes. If the City Council is supportive of implementing such a program, staff is
requesting feedback on the framework of the program and would present a proposal for formal approval at a
future EDA meeting.
Attachments
Memo from Vicki Holthaus (February 9, 2022)
Blaine Grants Available for Home Improvement
Coon Rapids 2022 Front Door Grant Program Information
Fridley Housing & Redevelopment Authority Front Door Grant Application
Projects Funded in 2021
MEMO
TO: KIRK MCDONALD
FROM: VICKI HOLTHAUS
SUBJECT: CONSIDER ALLOCATION OF $100,000 OF GENERAL FUND SURPLUS TOWARDS
THE EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENT REBATE PROGRAM
DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
The City received $1,106,158.24 of Federal American Rescue Act Plan (ARPA) funds in July of 2021 and
an additional $36,223.64 in November of 2021. The US Treasury allows for cities to utilize the lost revenue
provision of the Federal guidance to secure allocation of the funds. The City has determined adequate
governmental service expenditures occurred in 2021 to justify acceptance of the Federal allocation of ARPA
funds.
The City’s preliminary 4th quarter report shows a $200K deficit in the General Fund; however, the deficit
includes a $1,641,664 transfer out of the CARES Act funding received in 2020. If you exclude the transfer
out, the General Fund would report a $1,430,887 surplus for FY 2021. This is a result of revenue in excess
of budget, and expenditures below budget. It is important to recall that the transfer of the CARES Act
funding is possible due to the elevated fund balance generated in the General Fund; an amount well in
excess of the 42% reserve required by City policy.
City staff is recommending the City Council consider using $100,000 of this surplus to fund the initial year
of an exterior improvement rebate program. Subsequent years of the program would be funded by EDA
reserves. Any unused funds from the initial year of the program will be held over to provide funding in
subsequent years.
RECOMMENDATION
City Council approve the allocation of $100,000 of general fund surplus monies to support the
implementation of the Exterior Improvement Rebate Program.
Project
Front Door
Landscaping
Trim
Total
Cost
$800
$4,000
$2,000
$6,800
Rate
25%
25%
15%
Reimbursement
$200
$1,000
$300
$1,500
Home
Improvement
G r a n t s A v a i l a b l e f o r
P r o p e r t i e s 3 0 y e a r s o l d w i t h a n a s s e s s e d v a l u e
o f $3 5 0 ,0 0 0 o r l e s s c a n r e c e i v e g r a n t f u n d s
f o r e l i g i b l e i m p r o v e m e n t s .
All projects funded through the Front Door Program must include
at least $1,000 spent on items on the Beautification list. Maximum
reimbursement is $5,000.
Front Door Grant Major Remodeling Grant
Receive up to $7,500 in grant funds for major remodeling projects,
like adding on, finishing a basement, or gutting a kitchen.
Front door, storm door, and/or garage door
Sidelight windows by front door
Columns at front door
Covered front porch
Brick, stone, or shake
Alter roofline on front side of house
Permanent landscaping
Window boxes and shutters
Screening of utility boxes and/or garbage cans
Maintenance free decorative fence (wrought iron, composite,
other similar materials)
Beautification projects-reimbursed at 25% of cost
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Building an addition
Building a sunroom
Finishing an unfinished space
Constructing a covered front porch
Converting a garage into livable space (minimum garage space
required by code must remain)
Major kitchen, bathroom or basement remodel
Adding a bathroom
Reconfiguring living space (moving walls)
All projects must have a project cost of at least $35,000 and include
at least one major remodeling element:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Funds are limited. Grant funds are reserved for your project upon
execution of a grant agreement. Work initiated prior to grant
approval is not eligible. Grant funds are dispersed as a
reimbursement to the homeowner after completion of the work.
Projects including two exterior upgrades are reimbursed at a
rate of 15% of the project cost, up to $7,500.
Projects including one exterior upgrade are reimbursed at a rate
of 10% of the project cost, up to $5,000.
Projects including no exterior upgrades are reimbursed at a rate
of 5% of the project cost, up to $2,500.
Roof
Siding
Painting
Soffit or fascia
Trim
Gutters
Windows
Chimney repair, tuck pointing, repointing
Deck or porch – front yard or side yard visible from front of
house (repair or replace)
Retaining wall (repair or replace)
Driveway, sidewalk (repair or replace)
Basic projects-reimbursed at 15% of cost
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Examples
Altering the roofline
Constructing columns at the front door
Building a covered front porch
Enhancing the front of the house with brick, stone, or shake
Upgrading the front door and/or garage door if it faces the
street
Major landscaping (minimum cost of $2,000)
Other elements as approved by the EDA staff (does not include
maintenance work such as replacing siding or windows)
The reimbursement rate is determined by the number of exterior
upgrade projects:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Reimbursement Calculation
For more information, visit BlaineMN.gov/HousingInformation.
Project Example: Finishing a Basement - Finishing a basement can
double the square footage of a home. This project includes an
egress window and constructing a bathroom and costs $35,000. No
exterior upgrades are included so the project is reimbursed at 5% for
a reimbursement of $1,750. If the homeowner upgraded the front
door as part of the project, for a cost of $700, the project would be
reimbursed at 10% and would receive $3,570.
Examples
Funds are reserved upon execution of a grant agreement with the Blaine Economic Development Authority. All required permits for the project must
be obtained prior to execution of the grant agreement. See grant application for additional disclaimers.
Application deadline is March 1. Apply online at www.coonrapidsmn.gov/frontdoor
Recipients will be chosen by lottery drawing to be held on Wednesday, March 9. Due to evolving public health
recommendations surrounding the COVID -19 pandemic, the Front Door lottery event will occur either in person at Coon
Rapids City Hall or virtually. A decision regarding the final event style will be made by March 1, 202 2 and will be
communicated on the City website, City social media platforms and on the City’s email subscription list. Applicants would
not need to be present to win.
Program Intent
The intent of the Front Door Grant program is to pay a portion of project costs to Coon Rapids property owners who will
make certain exterior improvements to the front (street side) of their home, increasing its curb appeal which benefits the
entire community. There are no income limits to participate in this program.
Eligibility Requirements (all conditions must be met to be eligible)
1 to 4 unit buildings, owner-occupied, single family, townhome, twin home, or condo.
My home is located in Coon Rapids, MN and has homestead status with Anoka County Property Records. Relative
homestead is not eligible.
I am current on my Anoka County property taxes.
My property value is less than $400,000 based on Anoka County estimated property value.
My projects include at least one item from the Beautification Project list.
My projects will be visible from the street in front of my house.
None of my projects are covered, or will be covered, by an insurance claim.
None of my exterior projects will be part of a Home for Generations II grant.
Work cannot begin until the required paperwork has been submitted to the City an d a Grant Award Certificate has been
provided to and signed by the homeowner.
I was not a Front Door Grant recipient in 2019, 2020, or 2021.
***REQUIRED***
Beautification Projects (25% grant)
All applications must include at least one project from this list.
Optional
Basic Projects (15% grant)
Front door, storm door, and/or garage door
Sidelight windows by front door
Columns at front door
Covered front porch
Brick, stone, or shakes
Alter roofline on front of house
Permanent landscaping (includes tree trimming, removal and
replacement of overgrown and/or dead items, planting new trees,
shrubs, plants, and/or perennial flowers) $250 minimum
Driveway, sidewalk (repair or replace, stamped concrete)
Window boxes, shutters (add or replace)
Screening of utility boxes and/or garbage and recycling cans
Fence (add, repair, or replace)
Roof
Siding
Painting
Soffit
Fascia
Trim
Gutters
Windows
Chimney repair, tuck-pointing, repointing
Deck – front or side yard – visible from
front of house (repair or replace)
Porch Deck – front or side yard – visible
from front of house (repair or replace)
Retaining Wall (repair or replace)
} If any of these items are
completed on the front of
the house, then the cost
for the project to be
completed around all
sides of the house would
be eligible.
Front Door Grant Program
Page 2 of 2
Grant
Between $1,000 - $5,000. Homeowners must pay at least $4,000 of their own funds to be eligible to receive the minimum
grant amount of $1,000 from the City. Grant dollars do not need to be repaid. Grants will equal either 15% or 25% of the
applicant's individual project amounts depending upon the scope of work. If the scope of work includes qualifying projects
from both categories, then the grant amount will be determined individually in each category. Collectively, the combined
grant amount must be $1,000 or more (maximum $5,000) to be eligible. Cost of tools are not eligible for grant dollars.
Grant Award Steps (If you are chosen in the lottery, grant dollars will be reserved for you at Step 8)
1. Submit Front Door Grant Application -- DEADLINE MARCH 1, 2022
2. Optional - Landscape Architectural Consultation
3. Determine your project list
4. Collect bids from contractors and/or material lists from suppliers (for do-it-yourself projects)
5. Optional - Apply for and secure your financing
6. Email your bid(s) and/or material lists to the City
7. Apply for City permits
8. Sign the Grant Award Certificate with City Staff
9. Schedule with your contractor to begin work
10. Complete work and have all permitted work inspected and approved by the Building Inspections
Department
11. Schedule a final site visit with City Staff (separate from Building Inspections)
12. Grant dollars will be mailed to you
Financing - Optional
Grant dollars only pay for a portion of the project costs. The City has low-interest loans available to help finance the balance
of your project. Interest rates of 1% and 3% are available dependent on income, with no income limits. For more
information, please contact the Lending Center at the Center for Energy and Environment at www.mncee.org/coonrapids
or 612-335-5884.
Landscape Architectural Consultations - Optional
If landscaping is part of your project, you would be eligible for an at-home consultation with a landscape architect, which
will be discounted to $25. Information will be provided for you to schedule this appointment if you indicate your interest in
the application.
Don’t Forget
If you are chosen in the lottery, do NOT start your projects until you have submitted all of the needed documentation to
the City, obtained any required City permits, and signed your Grant Award Certificate with the City.
1
Fridley Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Front Door Grant Application
Intent of Program
The intent of this program is to encourage Fridley homeowners to increase the “curb appeal” of their home
(and the City) by making improvements on the street side of their home. To be eligible for this program,
homeowners must invest a minimum of $4,000 in projects from the “Beautification Projects” list below.
Applicant Information
Name of Owner(s):
Address:
Daytime Phone: Email:
Signature(s):
For All Persons Listed As An Owner of This Property – Certifying All Information Provided On This Application Is True And Accurate.
Housing Type:
___-Single Family House ___-Duplex
Eligibility Requirements (ALL conditions must be met to be eligible):
I own and live in the home to be remodeled. The home is located in Fridley.
Home has “Homestead” status and taxes are current, according to Anoka County records.
My home has an assessed value of $400,000 or less.
Work has not yet started on my home improvement project.
Project is visible from the street in front of the home.
Project includes at least one item from “Beautification Projects List” (below).
None of the projects are covered, or will be covered, by an insurance claim.
None of these projects will be part of a Fridley Foundations grants.
Applicant was not a Front Door Grant recipient within the past year.
***Projects started prior to submitting this application to the City, and receiving approval, will NOT be
eligible for program funding.
2
Version 2.0
Revised 5/24/2021 - NSA
Eligible Improvement Projects:
Only the improvement projects listed below are eligible for this program. At least $4,000 worth of the
“Beautification Projects” MUST be in your scope of work:
Beautification Projects (25% Grant) Basic Projects (15% Grant)
Front door, storm door and/or garage door Roof
Sidelight windows by front door Siding
Columns at front door Painting
Covered front porch Soffit
Adding brick, stone or shakes Facia
Alter roofline on front of home Trim
Driveway / Sidewalk (repair or replace) Gutters
Window boxes, shutters (add or replace) Window
Screening of utility boxes, garbage cans Chimney repair, tuck pointing, repointing
Decorative fence (add, repair or replace) Deck – front or side yard – visible from front o
home (repair or replace)
Permanent landscaping (inc. tree trimming,
removal & replacement of overgrown or dead
items, & new plantings) $250 minimum.
Porch – front or side yard – visible from
front of home (repair or replace)
Retaining wall (repair or replace)
Project Funding:
This grant program is funded by the City of Fridley Housing & Redevelopment Authority. The grant amounts
range from a minimum of $1,000 to a maximum of $5,000. If the scope of work contains qualifying work from
both project lists, the grant amount will be determined individually in each category.
Example: Homeowner spends $4,000 on projects from the beautification list (25%), and $2,000 from the
basic projects list (15%), homeowner is then eligible to receive a grant in the amount of $1,300 from the
City.
All funds will be available on a first come, first served basis. Funds will be reserved for your project once you
sign the Grant Agreement and will be disbursed to you after the work is completed.
Project Financing:
The grant offered through this program will cover only a portion of your project cost. How do you intend to
finance the balance of your total project?
City of Fridley HRA Low Interest Home Improvement Loan (OPTIONAL).
Loan or line of credit from your bank or credit union
Savings
Refinancing existing mortgage
Other:
3
***Please submit only pages 1 & 2 to the City – keep the following pages for your records***
Step by Step Application Process Checklist:
___- Step 1: Schedule a FREE Remodeling Advisor Visit.
If you are seeking advice about the projects you are considering, this is a FREE opportunity to
meet with a construction specialist at your home. You will receive un-biased advice, an idea of
potential costs and help prioritizing your projects. To schedule your Remodeling Advisor Visit,
please call CEE at 612-244-2470.
___- Step 2: Submit Application to the City (pages 1&2 of this document).
The City needs to verify that you and your property are eligible to proceed in the program. A
confirmation email will be sent once the City receives your application.
___- Step 3: Determine your final project list
A written list of your project wants & needs will allow you to provide contractors with a clear
vision of your project so they can provide you with an accurate bid/estimate.
___- Step 4: Collect bids from contractors (or material lists for DIY projects).
It’s always a good idea to solicit bids from 2 or 3 contractors, as pricing will vary. If you are
doing the work yourself, you must obtain a materials list showing the items, quantities, and
prices for the materials you will buy for your project. Tools are not eligible for reimbursement.
___- Step 5: Apply for and secure your project financing.
If you need financing for your project, you should get pre-approved to know you can finance
the improvements. You are NOT required to obtain financing through the City’s loan program,
but you may want to explore the options available through the City’s partnership with the
Center for Energy & Environment, including a 2% loan with no income limits. Contact CEE at
612-335-5884, loaninfo@mncee.org, or www.mncee.org/fridley.
___- Step 6: Select contractor and submit copies of selected bids to the City.
You can select any contractor licensed by the State of Minnesota and the City of Fridley. The
City will review all submitted contractor bids and/or material lists (for DIY projects) for eligibility
and verify project value.
___- Step 7: Apply for permits.
If a contractor is doing your project, they should complete this step. Please allow up to two
weeks for plan review and permit issuance. Please contact Building Inspections at 763-572-
3604 with any questions regarding permits or plan review. ALL permits for your project
(building, plumbing, electrical & mechanical) must be issued before proceeding to Step
8.
4
___- Step 8: Sign Grant Participation Agreement with the City
Once taxpayer information and bids have been submitted and ALL permits issued, you must
schedule a time to come into City Hall and sign your Grant Agreement. After the Grant
Agreement has been signed, funds will be reserved for your project. Your maximum grant
amount will be determined at this time and cannot be increased.
___- Step 9: Submit Taxpayer information on Form W9
These grant funds are considered income. The Fridley HRA must report the grant payment to
the Internal Revenue Service. As part of the grantmaking process, you will need to submit a
Form W9 including your Taxpayer Identification Number to the HRA, and the HRA will issue a
Form 1099-G to the grant recipient(s) by January 31 of the following year.
Grant recipients are responsible for including information concerning these funds on their
personal income tax statement. If you have questions about how this will affect your personal
taxes or your income-based or disability benefits, please seek advice from a tax expert.
___- Step 10: Schedule with your contractor to begin work & display yard sign.
As part of the program, grant recipients will place a Front Door Grant Program yard sign in their
front yard during the duration of the project. All work must be completed within 180 days of
signing the Grant Agreement.
___- Step 11: Complete work and have all permitted work inspected and approved.
Call Building Inspections at 763-572-3604 to schedule inspections.
___- Step 12: Schedule a final site visit with HRA Staff (separate from Inspections).
Site visit will verify that the work completed meets the requirements of the program and did
not substantially change from the plan originally submitted and approved.
___- Step 12: Grant will be disbursed to you.
Once you have submitted final paid invoices, lien waivers and a construction statement from
contractors or receipts from suppliers, verifying project amounts, your grant request will be
processed. A check will be made payable to you and mailed directly to you. The HRA will also
mail a Form 1099-G to the grant recipient(s) by January 31 of the following year.
___- Step 13: Consider showcasing your project.
The City of Fridley would like to showcase some of these exceptional remodeling projects to
help promote this program and encourage your neighbors to make similar improvements.
Staff may contact you in the future about photographing your project for a City Newsletter,
City Website or potentially a Home Remodeling Tour. You are not obligated to participate in
any of these activities.
Questions? Please contact Paul at 763-572-3591
Version 2.0
Revised 5/24/2021 - NSA
Projects Funded in 2021
Beautification Projects (25% reimbursement)
Alter Front Roofline 0 0.0%0 0.0%
Covered Porch/Patio 3 3.9%8 4.0%
Front, Storm, Garage Door 20 26.0%63 31.3%
Sidelight Windows/Window Boxes 2 2.6%1 0.5%
Columns 1 1.3%3 1.5%
Add Brick/Stone/Shake/Shutters 1 1.3%9 4.5%
Driveway/Sidewalk 26 33.8%61 30.3%
Front Stoop/Steps 0 0.0%12 6.0%
W-Box Shutters 2 2.6%0 0.0%
U Box Screen 2 2.6%0 0.0%
Decorative Fence 5 6.5%14 7.0%
Permanent Landscaping/Tree Trimming 15 19.5%30 14.9%
77 201
Basic Projects (15% reimbursement)
Roof 3 6.4%2 2.6%
Siding 6 12.8%13 16.7%
Painting 6 12.8%8 10.3%
Soffit/Fascia 11 23.4%10 12.8%
Trim 2 4.3%0 0.0%
Gutters 5 10.6%11 14.1%
Window 7 14.9%24 30.8%
Chimney Repair 3 6.4%0 0.0%
Deck / Porch (Front or Side)4 8.5%5 6.4%
Lighting 0 0.0%2 2.6%
Retaining Wall 0 0.0%3 3.8%
47 78
Fridley
Fridley
Coon Rapids
Coon Rapids
I:\RFA\City Manager\2022\WMFRD\WS 022222\11.5 Q ‐ West Metro Fire‐Rescue District Update 2.22.22.docx
Request for Action
February 22, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: City Manager
By: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Agenda Title
Update from West Metro Fire‐Rescue District
Requested Action
Staff requests the City Council receive an update from Chief Larson on West Metro Fire‐Rescue District
operations. The chief will be presenting updates to both the New Hope and Crystal city councils in the month
of February. Council Member Elder serves as the New Hope council representative on the board, and Marc
Berris serves as the New Hope citizen representative on the board. The city manager also serves on the board.
Policy/Past Practice
West Metro Fire‐Rescue District was formed in 1998 as a joint powers agreement between the cities of New
Hope and Crystal. The agreement was updated and approved by both city councils in 2011 and updated in
2017 and 2019. One of the items in the board’s work plan and in the chief’s goals is for the chief to provide
periodic updates to the city councils to keep the lines of communication open between the fire district and the
two cities. The last update was provided at the November, 2021 work session.
Background
The West Metro Fire‐Rescue District Board of Directors conducted a board meeting on February 9 and
attached is the Chief’s Report from that meeting. Chief Larson will be discussing the following routine items
with the City Council and is open to your comments and feedback:
2021 Calls for Service
Safer Grant
New Recruits
Be a Santa to a Senior
Ballistic Vests
Security Cameras
New Engines
Sale of Engine
Attachment
February 9, 2022 Chief’s Report
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.5
I:\RFA\City Manager\2022\City Manager Vacancy\WS 022222\11.6 Process Regarding City Manager Position Vacancy.docx
Request for Action
February 22, 2022
Approved by: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Originating Department: City Manager
By: Kirk McDonald, City Manager
Rich Johnson, Director of HR/Admin Services
Agenda Title
Discuss process regarding city manager position vacancy
Requested Action
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss the process to utilize to fill the city manager position vacancy
following the retirement announcement of the current city manager and provide direction to staff.
Policy/Past Practice
The last time the city manager position was filled was in 2007 via an internal promotion and appointment
that was unanimously supported by the City Council. The community development director was appointed
to serve as the acting city manager and after a 6‐month period was appointed as the permanent city manager.
An employment agreement was prepared that included an annual performance appraisal process and the
development of goals and objectives for approval by the City Council.
Background
On February 1 the current city manager announced his intention to retire on June 1, 2022. The City Council
should discuss the process to utilize to fill the vacancy. There are two options the Council may want to
consider:
1. Hire a professional consulting firm to conduct a recruitment process for a new city manager. The director
of HR/Administrative Services contacted several firms inquiring of a cost estimate, what was included in
the process and the typical timeline to conduct this type of recruitment. The following firms responded
and their complete proposals are attached.
Recruitment Firm Estimated Cost Timeline
Baker Tilly $24,500 4 months
DDA Human Resources, Inc. $22,000 5 months
Gov HR USA $20,500‐$23,500 4 months
Mercer Group Associates $17,500‐$21,500 5 months
If the Council desires to utilize the services of a professional recruitment firm, you may want to invite
several firms in for an interview so they can explain the process they use, pricing and timeline, prior to
selecting a firm. It is anticipated that the funding could be paid out of the current city manager budget
due to the salary cost difference between the current and new employee.
Cities in the nearby area that have utilized external recruitment firms in the recent past and appointed
external candidates include Golden Valley, St. Louis Park and Brooklyn Park. External recruitment would
provide a broad range of candidates to consider, but there is no familiarity with city operations or any
Agenda Section
Work Session
Item Number
11.6
Request for Action, Page 2
opportunity for “knowledge transfer”. Since the process with a recruitment firm could take up to 5
months, the Council will need to appoint an “acting city manager” to be in charge of city operations
between the time of the city manager’s departure and the start date of the new hire.
2. Appoint an internal qualified full‐time department head employee that is interested in the position,
possibly for a six‐month period as “acting city manager” on a trial basis. The appointment could be made
with the understanding that the employee would not lose their current position if they were not
eventually selected as the regular city manager. If the Council is interested in this option, the Council
could interview the employee to discuss expectations, etc., and an agreement could be prepared by the
city attorney outlining terms and conditions, including a salary increase.
Cities that have promoted an internal department head to the city manager position that I am familiar
with include Crystal, Robbinsdale, Plymouth, Coon Rapids and New Brighton. The process they utilized
included the following:
Direct Appointment: Crystal (2001)
Robbinsdale (2001)
External Application Process with Internal Appointment: Plymouth (2013)
Coon Rapids (2020)
New Brighton (2020)
External Application Process – No Appointment to Date Robbinsdale (2022)
The advantage of an internal promotion is familiarity with city operations, facilities, department heads/
employees, and there would be an opportunity for some knowledge transfer. It would also provide an
opportunity for an introduction to a variety of organizations where the city manager serves as the city
representative, including the Joint Water Commission and Hennepin Recycling Group, or as one of the
city’s representatives, including West Metro Fire‐Rescue District Board of Directors, Cable
Board/Commission and North Metro Mayors.
Whatever decision the City Council makes, it would be very advantageous to have the decision agreed upon
by all council members so the transition process can be as stable as possible and help to maintain the current
positive work culture.
Attachments
Organizations with city manager as city representative
Recruitment Firm Proposals
o Baker Tilly
o DDA Human Resources, Inc.
o Gov HR USA
o Mercer Group Associates
Sample Recruitment Brochures
o Robbinsdale
o Oakdale
o New Brighton
DDA Human
Resources, Inc.