Performance Measurement Report & SMART Goals 2016
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT REPORT
& SMART GOALS
8/15/2016 New Hope, Minnesota
In an effort to better measure and continually improve overall levels of
service and quality of life, the city of New Hope has developed the
Performance Measurement Report and SMART goals. The Performance
Measurement Report compares top tier indicators which capture the state
of the city, while SMART goals track Specific, Measureable, Achievable,
Realistic, and Timely objectives set forth by department heads.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT & SMART GOALS
Page 2
INDEX
OVERVIEW & HISTORY ........................................................................................... 3
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT .............................................................. 4
COMMUNITY SAFETY & SECURITY ..................................................................................... 5
PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY & COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY ....................................... 9
GENERAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION ......................................... 13
ATTRACTIVE, HIGH QUALITY NEIGHBORHOODS & BUSINESS DISTRICTS .............. 21
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT ...................................... 25
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO SIMILAR CITIES ................................................................ 26
FOOTNOTES ........................................................................................................................... 27
SMART GOALS ...................................................................................................... 28
GENERAL FUND .................................................................................................................... 29
PUBLIC SAFETY ...................................................................................................................... 32
STREETS ................................................................................................................................... 35
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ..................................................................................................... 37
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND .................................................................................................. 38
ENTERPRISE FUNDS ............................................................................................................... 39
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS .................................................................................................. 41
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT & SMART GOALS
Page 3
CITY OF NEW HOPE
O V E R V I E W & H I S T O R Y
LOCATION
The city of New Hope is a suburb located northwest of
Minneapolis with strong neighborhoods, an abundance
of parks and recreation opportunities, excellent
schools, with great shopping nearby. The city has easy
access to the entire Twin Cities area with major
arterials of Highway 169, Highway 100, Interstate
694, and Interstate 394 all nearby.
POPULATION (2010)
20,339
YEAR FORMED
1953
AREA
5.1 square miles
JOBS
11,080
BUSINESSES
490
PARKS/ACREAGE
18/200
SCHOOL DISTRICT
ROBBINSDALE AREA/281
SCHOOLS
5
CITY FACILITIES
Ice Arena, Swimming Pool, Golf Course, Outdoor Theater, Fire Station
HISTORY
1900s: Farming-rich community, settled as part of Crystal Lake Township
1930s: Residents of Crystal Lake Township began movement to incorporate township
1936: City of Crystal formed, rural residents in western half broke away and formed township
known as New Hope
1936-1953: Housing developments led to farmers being a minority in New Hope
1953: Rapidly developing township of New Hope incorporated as a city to prevent losing more
of its land and residents to Crystal via annexation
1953: Population of 600
1958: Population of 2,500
1971: Population of 24,000
CITY OF NEW HOPE
PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT REPORT
8/15/2016 New Hope, Minnesota
The city of New Hope Performance Measurement Report is a
cumulative summary report compiled from various sources, primarily
the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey,
and the Morris Leatherman Company Survey, an extensive
professional community-wide phone survey. SMART goals that
appear within the report are denoted with a light bulb symbol (💡).
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 5
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT REPORT
C O M P A R I S O N OF T O P T I E R IN D I C A T O R S
COMMUNITY SAFETY & SECURITY
New Hope
1. Safety (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Very or somewhat safe1/Excellent or good2 92% 91% 91%
Somewhat or very unsafe1/Fair or poor2 7% 8% 9%
Unknown1,2 1% 1% 1%
1Data for citizens’ rating of safety in the community from 2013 and 2014 was compiled from the City
Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part
of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of quality of service for police protection from 2015 was compiled from the
Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 92% N/A N/A 85% 86%
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 7% N/A N/A 15% N/A
Unknown 1% N/A N/A 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 91% 67%
N/A N/A N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 8% 33% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Very or somewhat safe/Excellent or good 91% 81% N/A N/A N/A
Somewhat or very unsafe/Fair or poor 9% 18% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1% 2% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 6
New Hope
2. Crime Rates 2012 2013 2014 2015
Part I crime rates 831 526 495 548
Part II crime rates 1,106 787 1,176 1,188
Crime rate data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Police department. Part I crimes include
murder, rape, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Part II crimes include
other assaults, forgery/counterfeiting, embezzlement, stolen property, vandalism, weapons, prostitutions,
other sex offenses, narcotics, gambling, family/children crime, DUI, liquor laws, and disorderly conduct.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2012 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crime rates 831 762 575 615 1,001
Part II crime rates 1,106 1,092 1,559 538 1,417
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crime rates 526 550 473 566 1,070
Part II crime rates 787 989 1,410 457 1,419
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crime rates 495 632 546 559 958
Part II crime rates 1,176 1,024 1,300 529 1,132
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Part I crime rates 548 563 515 516 995
Part II crime rates 1,188 996 1,491 574 1,100
Comparison data was compiled from reports posted on official city websites or requested and supplied
directly from city staff. “N/A” signifies that no data was available.
New Hope
3. Traffic Accident Rate 2012 2013 2014 2015
Accidents 358 365 448 410
Number per 1,000 population 17.60 17.95 22.03 20.16
Traffic accident rate data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Police department.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 7
New Hope
4. Police Response 2012 2013 2014 2015
Priority 1 call response time (average minutes) 3.60 3.93 5.03 4.36
Police response data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Police department.
New Hope
5. Emergency Services 2012 2013 2014 2015
Calls for service 642 658 812 758
Calls per 1,000 population 31.56 32.35 39.92 37.27
Emergency services data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the West Metro Fire Rescue District. Calls for
service include fire, hazardous conditions, target hazards, EMS, rescue, weather, police assistance, service,
good intent, and false alarms, amongst others.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2012 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 31.56 25.64 31.39 14.43
N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 32.35 29.39 38.53 14.00 N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 39.92 31.69 30.50 12.00 N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Calls per 1,000 population 37.27 34.13 34.34 N/A N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports posted on official city websites or requested and supplied
directly from city staff. “N/A” signifies that no data was available.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 8
New Hope
6. Fire Protection (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 70% 68% 92%
Fair 2% 2% 5%
Poor 0% 0% 0%
Unknown 28% 29% 3%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of fire protection services from 2013 and 2014 was compiled from
the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities
as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of quality of service for fire protection from 2015 was compiled from the Morris
Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 70% N/A 99% 96% 100%
Fair 2% N/A 0% 4% 0%
Poor 0% N/A 0% 0% 0%
Unknown 28% N/A 1% 0% 0%
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 68% 61% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 2% 6% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 0% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 29% 33% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 92% 61% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 5% 2% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 0% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 3% 38% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state. Note that data
may be skewed as many residents have not used fire services, thus rated service quality as “unknown.”
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 9
PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY & COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY
New Hope
7. City Services/Quality of Life (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 80% 77% 98%
Fair 13% 16% 2%
Poor 3% 2% 0%
Unknown 3% 5% 0%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the overall quality of city services from 2013 and 2014 was compiled from
the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities
as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of quality of life from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company
Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 80% N/A 86% 90% 86%
Fair 13% N/A 8% 9% N/A
Poor 3% N/A 1% 1% N/A
Unknown 3% N/A 5% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 77% 53% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 16% 42% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 2% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 5% 5% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 98% 80% N/A 90% N/A
Fair 2% 13% N/A 10% N/A
Poor 0% 2% N/A 0% N/A
Unknown 0% 5% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 10
New Hope
8. Creditworthiness 2012 2013 2014 2015
Bond rating 💡 AA AA AA AA
The city’s bond rating for 2012-2015 was determined by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services. Standard & Poor's
rating definitions state that “an insurer rated 'AA' has very strong capacity to meet its financial commitments and
differs from the highest-rated insurers only to a small degree.” The rating reflects an assessment of various
factors for the city, including adequate economy; strong management with “good” financial policies; adequate
budgetary performance, with an operating surplus in the general fund; very strong budgetary flexibility; very
strong liquidity; adequate debt and contingent liability position; and a strong institutional framework score.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2012 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AAA AA AA+
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AAA AA AA+
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA AA+
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Bond rating AA AA2 AA1 AA AA+
Comparison data was compiled from reports posted on official websites for each city. The AAA rating
represents minimum credit risk and signifies that the insurer has extremely strong capacity to meet its
financial commitments. It is the highest rating assigned by Moody’s Investors Service and Standard &
Poor’s. Moody’s AA1 rating and Standard & Poor’s AA+ rating are the second highest ratings assigned by
each agency and indicate a slightly higher rating as compared to Standard & Poor’s AA rating and
Moody’s AA2 rating.
New Hope
9. Financial Management 2012 2013 2014 20151
Unqualified audit on prior year’s financial statements 💡 TBD
Unqualified financial audits for 2012-2014 were performed by Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich
& Co., P.A.
1The 2015 audit will take place in May 2016.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 11
New Hope
10. Financial Condition 2012 2013 2014 20151
Property taxes $7,423,273 $7,803,838 $7,928,813 $8,308,447
Personnel costs $6,292,866 $6,592,257 $6,697,939 $7,409,500
Ratio of tax revenues to personnel costs 1.18 1.18 1.18 1.12
Financial condition data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s financial consultant, Abdo, Eick and
Meyers, LLP, as a part of the city’s Long Term Plan - 2013-2018.
1Data for 2015 is preliminary and may change slightly upon completion of 2015 Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report.
New Hope
11. Property Values 2012 2013 2014 2015
Taxable market value 💡 $1,223,862,183 $1,235,267,314 $1,334,517,728 $1,430,939,117
Percent change in taxable market value -7.98% 0.93% 8.03% 7.23%
Data for taxable market values of properties in New Hope for 2012-2015 was determined by Hennepin
County. Taxable market value for 2012 was payable in 2013, value for 2013 was payable in 2014, etc.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2012 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,223,862,183 $1,136,761,834 $2,744,389,240 $1,746,296,100 $2,327,199,260
Percent change in taxable market value -7.98% -12.07% -3.00% -4.57% -5.71%
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,235,267,314 $1,135,611,852 $2,719,232,050 $1,747,585,600 $2,308,801,930
Percent change in taxable market value 0.93% -0.10% -0.92% 0.74% -0.79%
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,334,517,728 $1,293,693,713 $2,934,477,667 $1,838,979,100 $2,541,853,432
Percent change in taxable market value 8.03% 13.92% 7.92% 5.23% 10.09%
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Taxable market value $1,430,939,117 $1,339,237,404 $3,097,563,064 $1,927,158,300 $2,670,879,248
Percent change in taxable market value 7.23% 3.52% 5.56% 4.80% 5.08%
Data for taxable market values was compiled from comprehensive market value reports posted on the
county’s website. “N/A” signifies that no data was available.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 12
New Hope
12. Employee Retention 2012 2013 2014 2015
Turnover rate 💡 6.3% 11.9% 8.4% 10.4%
Employee turnover rate data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Human Resources department.
New Hope
13. Risk Management 2012 2013 2014 2015
Number of insurance claims 31 29 23 26
Employee work injury claims data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Human Resources department.
New Hope
14. Environmental Stewardship 2013 2014 2015
Minnesota GreenSteps Cities rating Program Evaluation Step 2
Minnesota GreenStep Cities is a voluntary program offered by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and
its partners, offering cities a cost-effective, step-wise path to implement sustainable development best
practices. The rating ranges from Step 1 to Step 3 and was determined by the Minnesota GreenStep Cities.
The city will reach Step 3 in 2016.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 13
GENERAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE CONDITION
New Hope
15. City Roads (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 54% 43% 70%
Fair 30% 37% 22%
Poor 16% 21% 9%
Unknown 0% 1% 0%
1Data for citizens’ rating of city roads from 2013 and 2014 was compiled from the City Services Survey,
an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s
participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of pavement repair and patching from 2015 was compiled from the Morris
Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 54% N/A 80% 70% 89%
Fair 30% N/A 13% 25% N/A
Poor 16% N/A 7% 5% N/A
Unknown 0% N/A 0% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 43% 53% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 37% 37% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 21% 11% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 70% 80% N/A 62% N/A
Fair 22% 15% N/A 29% N/A
Poor 9% 5% N/A 9% N/A
Unknown 0% 0% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 14
New Hope
16. Pavement 💡 20131 20142 20152
Pavement condition rating 63 (fair) 61 (fair) 73 (good)
1Data for pavement condition rating for 2013 was compiled by GoodPointe Technology.
2Data for pavement condition ratings from 2014-2015 was compiled by the city’s Public Works/
Engineering department.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 15
New Hope
17. Road Snowplowing (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 79% 78% 88%
Fair 15% 15% 12%
Poor 5% 6% 1%
Unknown 1% 1% 0%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of snowplowing of city streets from 2013 and 2014 was compiled
from the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota
Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of snowplowing of city streets from 2015 was compiled from the
Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 79% N/A 95% 98% 82%
Fair 15% N/A 3% 2% N/A
Poor 5% N/A 2% 0% N/A
Unknown 1% N/A 0% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 78% 47% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 15% 21% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 6% 32% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 1% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 88% 44% N/A 75% N/A
Fair 12% 35% N/A 19% N/A
Poor 1% 20% N/A 6% N/A
Unknown 0% 2% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 16
New Hope
18. Water Utility Infrastructure 2012 2013 2014 2015
Water main breaks 28 29 28 21
Water main break data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Public Works department.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 17
New Hope
19. Water Quality (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 88% 85% 81%
Fair 8% 10% 18%
Poor 2% 2% 1%
Unknown 2% 3% 1%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the dependability and quality of the city water supply from 2013 and 2014
was compiled from the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League
of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of the taste and quality of drinking water from 2015 was compiled from the
Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 88% N/A 99% 70% 97%
Fair 8% N/A 1% 21% N/A
Poor 2% N/A 0% 9% N/A
Unknown 2% N/A 0% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 85% 79% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 10% 11% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 2% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 3% 11% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 81% 93% N/A 69% N/A
Fair 18% 5% N/A 19% N/A
Poor 1% 0% N/A 11% N/A
Unknown 1% 2% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the Performance
Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state. The cities of New Hope, Crystal, and
Golden Valley are members of the Joint Water Commission (JWC), a joint powers board that was formed in 1963 with
the intent of providing its member cities with a secure, reliable, cost-effective water supply. The JWC purchases water from
the city of Minneapolis, which draws its water supply from the Mississippi River in Fridley, where it is treated and purified.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 18
New Hope
20. Sewer Utility Infrastructure 2012 2013 2014 2015
Blockages 1 2 1 0
Blockages per 1,000 connections (5,400 connections) .185 .370 .185 .000
Sewer blockages data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Public Works department.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .370 N/A N/A .372 N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .185 N/A N/A .186 N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Blockages per 1,000 connections .000 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 19
New Hope
21. Sanitary Sewer Quality (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 81% 80% 82%
Fair 6% 8% 8%
Poor 1% 2% 1%
Unknown 11% 12% 9%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the dependability and quality of the city sanitary sewer service from 2013 and
2014 was compiled from the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the
League of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of the sanitary sewer service from 2015 was compiled from the Morris
Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 81% N/A 97% 70% 96%
Fair 6% N/A 2% 21% N/A
Poor 1% N/A 0% 9% N/A
Unknown 11% N/A 1% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 80% 79% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 8% 11% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 2% 5% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 12% 5% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 82% 90% N/A 86% N/A
Fair 8% 0% N/A 13% N/A
Poor 1% 0% N/A 1% N/A
Unknown 9% 11% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 20
New Hope
22. Ease of Getting Place to Place (Citizen Rating) 2014 2015
Excellent or good N/A 91%
Fair N/A 7%
Poor N/A 1%
Unknown N/A 1%
Data for citizens’ rating of the ease of getting from place to place within the city was compiled from the
Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey. “N/A” signifies that
data was not collected for the year listed.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 21
ATTRACTIVE, HIGH QUALITY NEIGHBORHOODS & BUSINESS DISTRICTS
New Hope
23. Development Activity 2012 2013 2014 2015
Permits Issued 2,167 2,212 2,141 2,169
Fees Collected 💡 $300,967 $356,242 $485,371 $512,461
Valuation of Work 💡 $12,813,093 $17,069,459 $32,802,509 $33,976,062
Permit data for 2012-2015 was compiled by city’s Community Development department.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2012 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits Issued 2,167 2,996 4,112 1,735 4,237
Fees Collected $300,967 $342,548 $1,144,906 $348,952 $814,951
Valuation of Work $12,813,093 $10,402,989 $64,648,443 $10,162,643 $51,226,807
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits Issued 2,212 3,128 4,429 1,711 4,599
Fees Collected $356,242 $411,100 $1,480,997 $388,407 $700,503
Valuation of Work $17,069,459 $9,162,312 $82,536,093 $12,798,218 $37,062,739
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits Issued 2,141 2,843 4,348 1,736 5,306
Fees Collected $485,371 $542,958 $1,543,913 $607,758 $838,248
Valuation of Work $32,802,509 $34,148,244 $93,039,155 $33,759,482 $53,657,313
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Permits Issued 2,169 2,883 4,813 2,527 5,914
Fees Collected $512,461 $390,165 $1,763,474 $987,518 $708,301
Valuation of Work $33,976,062 $10,182,327 $124,962,804 $44,930,313 $33,319,549
Comparison data was requested and supplied by each individual city. “N/A” signifies that no data was
available.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 22
New Hope
24. Recreation Programs & Facilities (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 74% 71% 85%
Fair 10% 11% 5%
Poor 2% 3% 1%
Unknown 13% 15% 10%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the quality of city recreational programs and facilities from 2013 and 2014
was compiled from the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League
of Minnesota Cities as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of recreation programs from 2015 was compiled from the Morris Leatherman
Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 74% N/A 96% 70% 71%
Fair 10% N/A 2% 25% N/A
Poor 2% N/A 0% 5% N/A
Unknown 13% N/A 3% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 71% 68% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 11% 32% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 3% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 15% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 85% 75% N/A 67% N/A
Fair 5% 14% N/A 29% N/A
Poor 1% 5% N/A 3% N/A
Unknown 10% 5% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 23
New Hope
25. Recreation Participation & Attendance 2012 2013 2014 2015
Participants in recreation programs 💡 32,307 25,962 25,229 25,257
Pool attendance 💡 27,190 20,102 18,259 17,210
Pool passes 💡 863 732 693 591
Golf rounds 💡 19,568 16,782 16,431 18,175
Open skating attendance 💡 1,059 1,170 1,229 1,646
Ice hours rented 💡 3,625 3,739 3,734 3,682
Recreation program participant data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Parks and Recreation
department.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2012 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 27,190 31,127 N/A N/A N/A
Pool passes 863 667 N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 20,102 30,184 N/A N/A 15,047
Pool passes 732 629 N/A N/A 491
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 18,259 28,042 N/A N/A 9,146
Pool passes 693 611 N/A N/A 683
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Pool attendance 17,210 30,745 N/A N/A 12,155
Pool passes 591 608 N/A N/A 766
Comparison data was requested and supplied directly from city staff. “N/A” signifies that no data was
available for reporting.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 24
New Hope
26. City/Neighborhood Appearance (Citizen Rating) 20131 20141 20152
Excellent or good 69% 65% 94%
Fair 27% 29% 5%
Poor 4% 6% 1%
Unknown 0% 0% 0%
1Data for citizens’ rating of the overall appearance of the city from 2013 and 2014 was compiled from
the City Services Survey, an annual paper and web-based survey hosted by the League of Minnesota Cities
as part of the city’s participation in the state’s Performance Measurement Program.
2Data for citizens’ rating of the overall general appearance of their neighborhood from 2015 was
compiled from the Morris Leatherman Company Survey, a professional community-wide phone survey.
Comparison to Other Cities – 2013 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 69% N/A 95% 91% 43%
Fair 27% N/A 5% 16% N/A
Poor 4% N/A 0% 2% N/A
Unknown 0% N/A 0% 0% N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2014 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 65% 39% N/A N/A N/A
Fair 29% 56% N/A N/A N/A
Poor 6% 6% N/A N/A N/A
Unknown 0% 0% N/A N/A N/A
Comparison to Other Cities – 2015 New Hope Crystal Golden Valley New Brighton Richfield
Excellent or good 94% 60% N/A 81% N/A
Fair 5% 36% N/A 16% N/A
Poor 1% 4% N/A 2% N/A
Unknown 0% 0% N/A 0% N/A
Comparison data was compiled from reports submitted by each individual city to the state as part of the
Performance Measurement Program. “N/A” signifies that no data was reported to the state.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 25
PUBLIC COMMUNICATION & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
New Hope
27. Website Traffic 2012 2013 2014 2015
Unique visitors 78,175 92,290 94,868 114,357
Website hit data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s Communications department.
New Hope
28. Meeting Viewership 2012 2013 2014 2015
Online views of city meetings 948 796 1,397 3,013
Online viewership data for 2012-2015 was compiled by Northwest Community Television, the
organization that broadcasts city meetings. Viewership numbers include City Council, EDA, and Planning
Commission meetings as well as candidate forums and state of the city events.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 26
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO SIMILAR CITIES
29. Tax Rate 2012 2013 2014 2015
New Hope1 54.80% 57.04% 58.69% 55.98%
New Hope without street infrastructure levy2 46.07% 49.75% 49.59% 47.42%
Crystal 51.34% 56.15% 54.81% 50.50%
Golden Valley 55.80% 58.20% 61.82% 54.63%
Champlin 41.20% 44.77% 44.73% 42.71%
Hopkins 58.68% 62.42% 62.42% 62.50%
Brooklyn Center 64.36% 71.07% 54.34% 71.29%
Tax rate data for 2012-2015 was compiled by the city’s financial consultant, Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP,
as a part of the city’s Long Term Plan - 2013-2018.
1New Hope’s total tax capacity rate does not take into account that New Hope does not levy special
assessments for street infrastructure improvement projects.
2Removing New Hope’s street infrastructure levy from the tax capacity rate puts it on an equal playing field
with neighboring communities. The city funds street infrastructure improvement projects through its annual
street infrastructure levy with the cost of street improvements spread across all taxpaying properties.
30. Debt Per Capita 2012 2013 2014 20151
New Hope 717 732 513 961
Crystal 604 703 607 TBD
Golden Valley 3,789 3,935 3,777 TBD
Champlin 485 614 N/A TBD
Hopkins 1,636 1,610 1,897 TBD
Brooklyn Center 594 865 798 TBD
Debt per capita data for New Hope from 2012-2014 was compiled by the city’s financial consultant,
Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, as a part of the city’s Long Term Plan - 2013-2018. Debt per capita data for
other cities from 2012-2014 was compiled from financial reports from official websites for each city.
“N/A” signifies that no data was available for reporting.
1Data for 2015 is preliminary and may change slightly upon completion of 2015 Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report. Comparison data will be available in April 2016 once the Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report is completed and audited.
CITY OF NEW HOPE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT REPORT
Page 27
FOOTNOTES
League of Minnesota Performance Measurement Survey responses by year:
2013 – 1,114 residents
2014 – 1,062 residents
Morris Leatherman Company survey responses by year:
2015 – 400 residents
Comparisons to other cities:
Crystal – 18-19 responses per question
New Brighton – 350-370 responses per question
Golden Valley and Richfield – Unknown number of responses (as per city staff)
The city of Crystal did not administer a survey in 2013. The cities of Golden Valley, New Brighton, and
Richfield did not administer a survey in 2014. The cities of Golden Valley and Richfield did not administer a
survey in 2015.
CITY OF NEW HOPE
SMART GOALS
8/15/2016 New Hope, Minnesota
The city developed SMART Goals (Specific, Measurable, Attainable,
Realistic, and Timely) in 2016 based off of sections of the annual
budget. The objective of a SMART goal is to tell exactly what is
expected, why it is important, who’s involved, where it is going to
happen, and which attributes are important. Such goals have a much
greater chance of being accomplished as compared to general goals.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 29
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
G O A L S F O R 2 016 A N D B E Y O N D
GENERAL FUND
City Manager
Goal: Coordinate with department heads to ensure an average of $500,000 per year in grants
or outside funding sources for city programs over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Assessing
Goal: Increase total city taxable property market value by $50 million per year over the next
five years.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$1,430,939,117 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Communications
Goal: Write and coordinate distribution of 12 “In the Pipeline” utility bill inserts annually over
the next three years.
2016 2017 2018
TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Execute 50 reader board updates annually over the next three years.
2016 2017 2018
TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 30
Elections
Goal: Achieve at least 55% voter turnout rate for gubernatorial races and at least 80% voter
turnout rate for presidential races over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Finance
Goal: Increase bond rating from AA to AA+ in the next five years.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
AA TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Conduct unqualified audit on prior year’s financial statements with clean findings
annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Human Resources
Goal: Maintain employee turnover rate of 12% or below over the next three years.
2016 2017 2018
TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 31
Planning
Goal: Increase population recorded from 2010 census by at least 3% by 2020 census.
2010 2020
20,339 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase median household value by at least 3% over the next five years.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$199,000 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 32
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police
Goal: Increase training time department-wide by 5% per year over the next three years to
accommodate societal expectations of police response.
2015 2016 2017 2018
48 hours TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase the number of inter/intra-jurisdictional traffic details over the next three years.
2015 2016 2017 2018
20 TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase efforts to recruit and retain police officers in a growing competitive climate.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Reserves/Explorers
Goal: Increase number of police reserves by at least 5% over the next three years.
2015 2016 2017 2018
8 TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase number of police explorers by at least 5% over the next three years.
2015 2016 2017 2018
3 TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase number of community education and outreach programs.
2015 2016 2017 2018
33 TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 33
Animal Control
Goal: Maintain average number of goose nests in city from 2013-2015 at same level for
2016-2018.
2013-2015 2016
12.33 9
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Fire & EMS
Goal: Complete a minimum of 30 Home Safety Surveys annually over the next three years.
2016 2017 2018
TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase EMS stand-by shifts by one shift per year over the next three years.
2015 2016 2017 2018
116 TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Attract a minimum of 50 firefighter candidates each year recruiting takes places over
the next ten years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Receive $50,000 in grants and reimbursements annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 34
Protective Inspections
Goal: Increase fees collected for permits from 2013-2015 by 10% for 2016-2018.
2013-2015 2016-2018
$1,354,074 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase valuation of work for permits from 2013-2015 by 10% for 2016-2018.
2013-2015 2016-2018
$83,848,030 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Perform at least 600 compliance investigations annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 35
STREETS
Engineering
Goal: Input new assets into asset management program relative to infrastructure projects after
project completion and record drawings are available.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Develop a city plate of construction standards for infrastructure in the next three years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Streets
Goal: Achieve an average Pavement Rating Index (PRI) of 70 or greater annually.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase Pavement Rating Index (PRI) for city roads over the next five years.
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
73 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Update Pavement Management Plan annually over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Establish a level of sweeping to lower phosphorus levers in storm water runoff.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 36
Recreation
Goal: Increase overall program participation from 2015 by 5% for 2016.
2015 2016
25,257 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Parks
Goal: Replace minimum of one playground structure per year over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Swimming Pool
Goal: Increase attendance at pool from 2015 by 10% for 2016.
2015 2016
17,210 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase number of pool passes sold from 2015 by 5% for 2016.
2015 2016
591 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 37
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
Economic Development Authority (EDA)
Goal: Facilitate the demolition and construction or renovation of at least six scattered site
single family homes per year over the next three years.
2016 2017 2018
TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Attract at least 10 new businesses per year over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Solid Waste Management
Goal: Maintain 80% or greater recycling participation rate over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Average 450 pounds recycled per household per year over the next five years.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 38
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
Park Infrastructure
Goal: Increase levy by 3% per year over the next five years to increase funds available for
various park improvements.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Street Infrastructure
Goal: Reconstruct or mill and overlay streets as proposed in five-year Capital Improvement
Plan.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase resident awareness of projects in the next five years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 39
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Sanitary Sewer
Goal: Clean all city sewers by at least every four years, as required by the League of
Minnesota Cities.
2016 2017 2018 2019
TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Implement I & I program for private residences in next five years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Implement two year lining contracts and increase feet per year installed of lining.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Water
Goal: Increase involvement with Joint Water Commission (JWC) water supply system -
supervisor or staff to work 1 day per month at each ground reservoir.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase maintenance efficiency of staff using portable computing equipment in the next
two years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Storm Water
Goal: Improve water quality in Northwood Lake in the next five years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Database Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) and inventory public and
private systems in the next two years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Database annual private permit agreements and enforce.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 40
Street Lighting
Goal: Coordinate with Xcel Energy to convert streetlights to LED in the next five years.
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Golf Course
Goal: Increase number of golf rounds purchased in 2015 by 3% per year from 2016-2018.
2015 2016 2017 2018
18,175 TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Ice Arena
Goal: Increase ice hours rented in 2015 by 5% for 2016.
2015 2016
3,682 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Goal: Increase open skating attendance in 2015 by 10% for 2016.
2015 2016
1,646 TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
CITY OF NEW HOPE SMART GOALS
Page 41
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Central Garage
Goal: Increase replacement fund for general fund budgets from 75% to 100% in the next
three years.
2016 2017 2018
TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.
Information Technology
Goal: Retire 25% of desktop/laptop computers each year in conjunction with the four-year
replacement schedule.
2016 2017 2018 2019
TBD TBD TBD TBD
Status: Update on status of this SMART goal goes here.