Loading...
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.