HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 06.gDate June 6, 2011
Proposed Action
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move to approve the Resolution Adopting
Performance Measurement Program.
Approval of the Resolution will result in levy limit exemption for 2011 . and $.14 per capita
reimbursement from State of Minnesota LGA program.
Overview
RESOLUTION ADOPTING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT PROGRAM
In 2010, the Legislature created the Council on Local Results and Innovation. In February 2011,
the Council released a standard set of ten performance treasures for counties and ten performance
measures for cities that will aid residents, taxpayers, and state and local elected officials in
determining the efficacy of counties and cities in providing services, and measure residents'
opinions of those services. By February of 2012, the Council must create comprehensive
performance measurement systems for cities and counties to implement in 2012. Cities and
counties that choose to participate in Ole new standards measurement program may be eligible for
a reimbursement from LGA, and exemption from levy limits.
Primary Issues to Consider (see attached)
➢ Participation
Y Implementation
➢ Benefits
➢ Reporting and requirements for 2012 and beyond
Supporting Information
Item
Financial Impact: budgeted: Yes Source:
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.):
Notes:
Primary Issues to Consider
➢ Participation. Participation in the performance measurement program by a city or a
county is voluntary. Cities that choose to participate in the performance measurement
program must officially adopt the corresponding 10 performance benchmarks developed
by the Council, and implement them in 2011. A copy of the performance benchmarks is
shown below.
➢ Reporting Requirements for 2011. In order to receive the per capita reimbursement in
2011, and levy limit exemption for calendar year 2012, Cities must:
File a report with the Office of the State Auditor by July 1, 2011. This report will consist
of a declaration approved by the city council or county board stating that the city /county
has adopted the corresponding 10 performance measures developed by the Council.
To meet the reporting requirements for 2011, a copy of the declaration in a PDF format
can be attached to an email and sent to: gidgosa.state-inn us.
• Implementation. The following is a succinct overview of the status of the indicators.
Performance Indicator
General
Citizen survey - quality of services
Citizen survey — overall appearance
Percent change in the taxable property market value
Police
Citizen survey rating safety or ...Part I and II crime rates
Police response times
Fire
Citizen survey - quality of services or ISO rating
Fire response times
Streets
Citizen survey - quality of road conditions or... Average
pavement condition rating
Citizen survey - quality of snow plowing
Water
Citizen survey - quality and dependability
Operating cost per million gallons
Sanitary sewer
Citizen survey - quality and dependability
Number of sewer blockages
Parks and Recreation
Citizen survey - quality of services
The citizen survey questions will be conducted on -line through the City web -site. The
results of 2011 performance measurements will be published prior to December 2012.
Benefits. A county or city that elects to participate in the performance measurement
program for 2011 is eligible for a reimbursement of $0.14 per capita in local government
aid, not to exceed $25,000 and is also exempt from levy limits under sections 275.70 to
275.74 for taxes payable in 2012, if levy limits are in effect.
➢ Reporting and Requirements for 2012 and Beyond. Annual reporting will be required
by the cities and counties that participate in the program Ry July 1, 2017 Pities and
counties will be required to report to the OSA that they have adopted and implemented
both the performance benchmarks, and the performance measure system released by the
Council in February of 2012. A declaration will be required that the city /county has
reported or will report the results for calendar 2011 of the 10 adopted measures to its
residents before the end of calendar year 2012. A county or city that elects to participate
in the performance measurement program for 2012 is eligible for a reimbursement of
$0.14 per capita in local government aid, not to exceed $25,000 and is also exempt from
levy limits under sections 275.70 to 275.74 for taxes payable in 2013, if levy limits are in
effect.
The Council on Local Results and Innovation 2011
Legislative Report
February 14, 2011
February 14, 2011
To the Property and Local Sales Tax Division of the House of Representatives, Taxes Committee and
the Taxes Division on Property Taxes of the Senate Tax Committee,
Per the requirements of 2010 Minnesota Laws Chapter 389, Article 2, Sections 1 and 2, the Council
on Local Results and Innovation is submitting its recommended "... standard set of approximately ten
performance measures for counties and ten performance measures for cities that will aid residents,
i
taxpayers, and state and local elected officials in determining the efficacy of counties and ernes in
providing services, and measure residents' opinion of those services." The recommended model
performance measures are attached. Local government and public feedback was solicited on the
proposed benchmarks.
The members of the Council include:
Patricia Coldwell, Association of Minnesota Counties
John Gunyou, City of Minnetonka
Mark Hintermeyer, City of Moorhead
Jay Kiedrowski, Humphrey School, University of Minnesota
Katie Nerem, Blue Earth County
Rebecca Otto, Minnesota State Auditor
Jay Stroebel, City of Minneapolis
Matt Stemwedel, City of Woodbury
Wendy Underwood, City of St. Paul
Tim Walsh, Scott County
Ben Woessner, City of Pelican Rapids
The Council received no funding to conduct their work. Meeting minutes were taken by volunteers,
and the Office of the State Auditor posted all meeting materials and meeting dates on the Office of
the State Auditor website. All meetings were open to the public.
The Council sees value in having all counties and cities in Minnesota develop performance measures
that they use to manage their jurisdictions and having results of those performance measures shared
with citizens and property tax payers. Our recommended performance measures should be
considered examples to assist counties and cities in developing their own performance measures. The
Council was concerned about the misuse of these performance measures by the legislature or others
in the appropriation of funds or for comparisons among counties and cities. The general perfoiniance
measures recommended are simply inadequate for those purposes.
The Council on Local Results and Innovation is proceeding to meet the additional requirements of
the statute, which is to "develop recommended minimum standards for comprehensive
performance measurement systems by February 15, 2012." We interpret "performance measurement
system" to mean more broadly a performance management system that uses perfoiuiance measures
to manage counties and cities.
Representatives of the Council would welcome the opportunity to discuss the Council's work, our
recommended model performance measures, and our concerns about the use of these measures.
Sincerely,
Jay Kiedrowski, Chair
Minnesota Council on Local Results and Innovation
Cc: House Speaker, House Minority Leader, Senate Majority Leader, and Senate Minority Leader
Attached: Model Perfoiuiance Measures for Cities
Model Performance Measures for Cities
The following are the recommended model measures of performance outcomes for cities, with
alternatives provided in some cases. Key output measures are also suggested for consideration by
local city officials.
General:
1.
Rating of the overall quality of services provided by your city (Citizen Survey: excellent, good, fair,
poor)
Percent change in the taxable property market value
Citizens' rating of the overall appearance of the city (Citizen Survey: excellent, good, fair, poor)
Police Services:
1.
Part I and II crime rates (Submit data as reported by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension. Part 1 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, prostitution, other sex offenses, narcotics, gambling,
family /children crime, D. UI, liquor laws, disorderly conduct, and other offenses.)
OR
Citizens' rating of safety in their community (Citizen Survey: very safe, somewhat safe,
neither safe nor unsafe, somewhat unsafe, very unsafe)
Output Measure:
Police response time (Time it takes on top priority cabs from dispatc
on scene.)
Output Measure:
Fire response time (Time it takes from dispatch to apparatus on scene for
dispatched as a possible fire).
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) response time (if applicable) (Time
dispatch to arrival of EMS)
o the first officer
Fire Services:
1.
Insurance industry rating of fire services (The Insurance Service Office (ISO) issues ratings to Fire
Departments throughout the country for the effectiveness of their fire protection services and
equipment to protect their community. The ISO rating is a numerical grading system and is one of
the primacy elements used by the insurance industry to develop premium rates for residential and
commercial businesses. ISO analyzes data using a Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS) and
then assigns a Public Protection Classification from 1 to 10. Class 1 generally represents superior
property fire protection and Class 10 indicates that the area's fire suppression program does not
meet ISO's minimum criteria.)
OR
Citizens' rating of the quality of fire protection services (Citizen Survey: excellent, good,
fair, poor)
calls that are
it takes from
Streets:
1.
Average city street pavement condition rating (Provide average rating and the rating system
program/type. Example: 70 rating on the Pavement Condition ,Index (PCI))
OR
Citizens' rating of the road condition
good condition, many bad spots)
n the
city (Citizen Survey: good condition, mostly
2.
Citizens' rating the quality of snowplowing on city streets (Citizen Survey: excellent, good, fa
poor)
Water:
1.
Citizens' rating of the dependability and quality of city water supply (centrally provided system)
(Citizen Survey: excellent, good, fair, poor)
Output Measure:
Operating cost per 1,000,000 gallons of water pumped /produced (centrally provided
system) (Actual operating expense for water utility / (total gallons pumped /1,000, 000))
Sanitary Sewer:
Citizens' rating of the dependability and quality of city sanitary sewer service (centrally provided
system) (Citizen Survey: excellent, good, fair, poor)
Output Measure:
Number of sewer blockages on city system per 100 connections (centrally provided
system) (Number of sewer blockages on city system reported by sewer utility /
(population/100))
Parks and Recreation:
1.
Citizens' rating of the quality of city recreational programs and facilities (parks, trails, park
buildings) (Citizen Survey: excellent, good, fair, poor)
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PERFORMANCE MEASURES
WHEREAS, the State Legislature created the Council on Local Results and Innovation; and
WHEREAS, the Council released a standard set of performance measures for counties and cities
that will aid residents, taxpayers and state and local elected officials in determining the efficacy of
counties and cities in providing services and measure residents' opinions of those services; and
WHEREAS, cities and counties that choose to participate in the new performance measurement
program may be eligible for a reimbursement from Local Government Aid and exemption from
levy limits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lakeville does
hereby approve the following Performance Measures and will publish the results of the Performance
Measures prior to December 31, 2012.
Performance Indicator
General
Citizen survey - quality of services
Citizen survey - overall appearance
Percent change in the taxable property market value
Police
Citizen survey rating safety or ...Part 1 and 1I crime rates
Police response times
Fire
Citizen survey - quality of services or ISO rating
Fire response times
Streets
Citizen survey - quality of road conditions or...
Average pavement condition rating.
Citizen survey - quality of snow plowing
Water
Citizen survey - quality and dependability
Operating cost per million gallons
Sanitary sewer
Citizen survey - quality and dependability
Number of sewer blockages
Parks and Recreation
Citizen survey - quality of services
APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Lakeville, Minnesota, this 6`" day of June 20I 1.
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
By:
Mark Bellows, Mayor
ATTEST:
Charlene Friedges, City Clerk