Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13.F.1. League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) Community ConversationsTO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: 1. Research 2. Awareness- building 3. Community Conversations 4. Policy Development 5. Legislative Action CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum Mayor and City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator LMC Community Conversations February 1, 2011 Comment: Introduction: The Council is asked to consider whether Shakopee should submit an application to be a host city for a League of Minnesota Cities - sponsored "Community Conversation ". The purpose of the conversations is to discuss the provision and funding of municipal services. Background: The League of Minnesota Cities (LMC or "League ") is an association of most of the cities throughout the state. The League recently sponsored a financial sustainability study of cities by the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota. That study concluded that if current revenue and spending trends continue, and no policy changes are made, Minnesota cities of all sizes, in all regions of the State, will be financially broke by the year 2015. According to this projection, cities overall will see a deficit of 35% of city revenues by 2025. The study notes that it makes no difference where the cities are located, how large or small their populations, what the local tax base is, and what the local economy looks like; all types of Minnesota cities will be in a deficit -mode if major changes aren't made regarding city services. The financial future of local governments in Minnesota is unsustainable if changes are not made. To try to indentify answers to this vexing problem, the League established the "Cities, Services and Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions" project. The project consists of five phases, which are: The first two phases are substantially complete; the project is now moving into the Community Conversations phase. In this phase, the LMC is now seeking to engage people throughout the state to discuss what the future of local government services should be. It is especially seeking members of the general public (not just policy makers) for their input. 13. F: I. In the Community Conversation phase, six to ten cities from around the state will host Community Conversations with members of the public. The League envisions a total of four conversations per city during a relatively short period of time. The intent would be to have the conversations "go to where the people are" —for example, where work or events which normally draw people in. This could be a local service club; a lunchtime gathering in a conference room or lunch room of a local workplace; during a church "social hour "; or the like. About 90 minutes would be needed for each conversation. The schedule is anticipated to be: • First conversation- -What services should cities provide, and at what levels? • Second conversation —How should city services be delivered? • Third conversation- -How should city services be financed? • Fourth conversation- -The "wrap up" session, in which those who participated in the previous sessions, and members of the broader community will be invited together. The focus would be to bring together the perspectives gathered during the first three conversations, and discuss trade -offs. It should be emphasized that these conversations will be talking about cities in general, and will not focus on the host city's own services or challenges. The League notes, however, that participants may be provided with a context that could be helpful to tailoring specific conversations about service provisions for the host city in the future. Expectations of the Host Community: The LMC portrays this project as being of minimal impact on City elected officials or staff . The League will facilitate the discussions and provide hand -out communication pieces to promote the events. The Host City's responsibility will be to market and promote the event, work with local groups to schedule the individual conversations and encourage participation, and work with the League regarding logistics. The League will likely choose communities which are able to demonstrate that they already have an existing network of active community partners. I would note that while Shakopee has a number of groups which could be approached, it does not have a tradition where organizations interact regularly with the City on general municipal issues. We anticipate that we would approach one or more of the local service clubs, and the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce. However, if Shakopee is chosen, the City Council will need to provide suggestions and guidance on how to provide for a wider cross - section of the community at large to participate. The League is looking for representation from a variety of types of cities, and being a growing suburban community that does not depend on state aid may make Shakopee an attractive candidate. Participating in the Community Conversations project would give the League an opportunity to hear directly from Shakopee residents regarding their values and priorities for local government services. Timing: Applications for hosting a Community Conversation must be submitted by Friday, February 11, 2011. Host City decisions will be made by March 1 It is anticipated that the Community Conversations will be held during the spring and summer. Host cities will receive one complimentary registration for the LMC annual conference in June, in Rochester. Recommendation: Assuming the Council is willing to actively participate and promote Shakopee as a Host City for the Community Conversation, the Council should authorize staff to submit an application to be a Host City. Relationship to Vision: This supports Goal D— Maintain, improve, and create strong partnerships with other public and private sector entities, and Goal C Maintain the City's financial health. Action Required: If the Council so desires, it should, by motion, direct staff to make application for Shakopee to be a Host City for the League of Minnesota Cities' Community Conversation regarding local government services. JAL) / vut LS, ,,,, Mark McNeill MM:cn City Administrator • Cities, Services & Funding: Braider Thinking, Better Solutions June 2010 League of Minnesota Cities The Projected Future of City Budgets through 2025 Key Findings from the Projection: • Cities of every size, in every region, will be broke by 2015 if no policy changes are made. • By the year 2025, cities overall would see a deficit of 35 percent of city revenues. • Fundamental changes are needed in city services and funding in order for these projections to be avoided. • Projecting city revenue and expenditure trends into the future reveals that all types of Minnesota, cities cities of every size, in every region —will be broke by the year 2015 if no policy changes are made. And in many kinds of communities, this is ; a reality today as revenues fall short of what cities need to provide services. • Cities overall would see a deficit of 35 percent of city revenues by the year 2025. • ° For this projection of the future to be avoided, fundamental changes are needed in the way that city services are funded. Key Findings from the projection 5% 0% -5% -10% -15% -20% -25% -30% -35% -40% -45% -50% -55% Minnesota Average City Greater Minnesota; Regional Center Cities of all types will be in the red by 2015 unless a than As are ae All types of cities in all regions of the state will be unable to pay the bills within the next five years if they continue on their current financial path. Looking out as far as 2025 reveals that cities overall would still be in the red if policy changes are not enacted. Put another way, by the time babies born this year are in first grade cities of all population and tax base sizes, in all parts of the state, would be in the red if historical revenue and expenditure trends continue. The League of Minnesota Cities contracted with researchers at the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota to carry out an analysis of city budgets.This analysis is a foundational piece of the new effort titled: "Cities, Services & Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions " -an initiative currently underway by the League to spur public dialogue about the future among the city com- munity, the public, the media, and policymakers. All types of Minnesota cities in deficit by 2015 (surplus/deficitas percent oftotal revenue) Greater Minnesota City; Less than 1,000 people Greater Minnesota City; Greater than 2,500 people Exurban Fringe City The chart below shows when different kinds of cities will be in a deficit if revenue and expendi- ture trends continue without intervening policy changes and what portion of city revenues those deficits will represent. The fact is that this projection of the future cannot be allowed to happen in real life. By law, cities must balance their budgets. City officials will therefore have no choice but to enact more of the painful decisions they are already making today — primarily, cutting services and raising property taxes —to avoid this massive deficit. And unlike the state or federal government, cities do not have another level of government to shift the problem to— their options for resolving a deficit of this magnitude are much more limited and will affect local residents and businesses directly. Metro Central City 2010 2015 • 2025 Metro Slow Growth City Metro Fast Growth City Tough choices ahead These findings are staggering —that cities of all kinds will fall into a deficit within the next five years and be unable to provide the level of services residents and businesses have come to expect. In other words, it won't mat- ter where a city is, how big or small its popula- tion, what its tax base composition is, what its local economy looks like, or what its unique mix of revenue sources is —all types of cities end up in the red if nothing changes. If cities reach the point where they are un- able to pay the bills, agonizing choices would have to be made that would impact the day to day lives of Minnesota families, businesses, and communities across the state. Cities would become very different places in which to live, work, and play. Why this analysis was done, and why it's so important Cities that rely on local government aid (LGA) and other state programs have experienced dramatic cuts since 2003, and with a $6 billion state deficit looming, the prospect of restoring that funding looks grim, to say the least. All cities — regardless of the level of LGA they receive —are facing growing community pressure for expanded services and lower taxes. Population trends, such as the aging of the Baby Boom generation, are raising the expectations for many services. Yet at the same time, city councils are reluctant to raise property tax levies or fees because they know Minnesotans are dealing with a We need broader thinking and better solutions The League believes that the time has come for bold action: a complete rethinking of the services cities provide and how to pay for those services. To find better solutions for the people of Minnesota, a broader conversation must begin now--in cities of every size in every corner of the state. Broader thinking is needed —where more Minnesotans are involved in the conversation and the conversation is about more than the current ways of doing things. The solutions aren't obvious. We need more than just those who are typically involved in public policy to be thinking and talking about cities, services and funding in order to ensure that what we know and love about our com- munities will be there in the future. To illustrate, in a deficit situation as severe as projected, cities as a group would have to eliminate a wide range of services or double property tax levies. For senior citizens across the state, those service cuts could mean no access to a library or a senior center. For children and families, there could be no baseball fields, hockey rinks or swimming pools for after - school and summer recreation. For homeowners, property values could decline as sidewalks and streets crumble into a maze of cracks and potholes. This isn't hyperbole —it's simply the continuation of the slow path of degradation Minnesotans have been seeing for the past seven years. tough economy and are increasingly on fixed incomes. In response to this current situation, the League asked the Humphrey Institute to calculate a projection of what the future would look like if nothing changes —if no property tax levies were raised, LGA funding was essentially flat, and services remained at current levels.The Humphrey Institute projec- tion confirms that the future is not sustainable given the current financial trends and historic relationship between the state and cities. The time has come to find a new state -local financial relationship. To this end, the League plans to get Minnesotans of all walks of life, in all regions of the state, thinking and talking about what the future holds for their communities.The plan is to hold a variety of community conver- sations throughout Minnesota over the course of 2010 and 2011. The League has already begun to collect citizen perspectives through its new blog site: www.outsidetheox.org. The thoughts gathered from citizens will form the basis for policy proposals and, hopefully, legislative action. The League is confident that the collective thinking of Minnesotans throughout the state will lead policymakers toward better solutions for our communities. Research staff at the Humphrey Institute performed two main tasks' as part of the analysis: projection of overall city revenues and expen ditures through the year 2025 and interviews with city officials across the state.The researchers relied primarily on city revenue and expen- diture data from the Office of the State Auditor's annua city finances reports. The most recent data from the OSA is for city budget year 2008. LMC provided historical data from the Department of Revenue on local government aid, market value homestead credit reimbursement and property tax levies. The researchers looked at 11 years worth of historical city revenue and expenditure data as well as data on property taxes, and state aids and credits. on those historical trends and assuming current policies con - tinue unchanged, they projected that total city revenues will increase at an annual rate of 3.7 percent between 2010 and 2025 and that total city expenditures will grow at an annual rate of 5.5 percent in that time period.That projection is the status quo outcome if no policy changes are enacted between now and then. Cities are facing and will continue to face severa cost pres- sures that are beyond local control such as the price of fuel, rising health care costs, forec osures, and changing demographics.The researchers calculated the overall city surplus or deficit at various points in the future as a percentage total city revenues. The researchers also projected revenues and expenditures for eight different profiles of cities. The projections for these profiles serve to demonstrate the extent to which the problem of expenditures outstripping revenues spreads to cities of all kinds (see Appendix for revenue and expenditure figures for all profiles). Methodology cont'd The profiles are based on demographic and geographical characteristics and are as follows: • Minnesota average city: profile built for city with average population (excluding Minneapolis and St. Paul ) Minnesota central city: average of Minneapolis and St. Paul Greater Minnesota regional cities: cities out- side the seven - country metro area that serve as regional hubs (e.g., Albert Lea, Mankato) • Greater Minnesota cities under 1,000 • Greater Minnesota cities greater than 2,500 (excluding regional centers) (e.g., Olivia, Two Harbors) Exurban fringe cities: cities essentially part of metropolitan area but Tying just outside seven - county boundaries (e.g., Elk River, Rockford) Metro slow growth cities: 14 cities that have not grown over last 28 years (e.g., Edina, West St. Paul) Metro fast growth cities: 73 metro cities that have seen population growth over 100 percent in last 28 years (e.g., Apple Valley, Lakeville) To better understand what these projections might mean for individual cities in terms of the kinds of decisions local leaders would face, interviews were conducted with city officials representing each profile city. Cities belonging to each profile were randomly selected as in- terview candidates. Researchers contacted the chief administrative officer of as many of them as possible during the study period. A total of 36 interviews was conducted. City officials de- scribed potential cuts to parks, libraries, hous- ing, and capital projects. Many stressed that service levels would decline. Of top concern among the various pressures on cities budgets APPENDIX - City Profiles: Revenue and Expenditures through 2025 2007 2008 2009 Minnesota Average City Surplus /(Deficit) in $'s Total Revenues 5,847,369 6,011,870 Total Expenditures 5,453,187 5,566,812 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 394,182 445,058 Minnesota Metro Central City Surplus /(Deficit) In $'s Total Revenues : 766,163,027 ` 795,302,404 Total Expenditures 722,437,012 738,666,147 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 43,726,016 56,636,257 Greater Minnesota Regional Surplus /(Deficit) in S's Total Revenues 27,463,564 27,887,156 Total Expenditures 25,621,547 27,875,680 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 1,842,017 '+ 11,476 Greater Minnesota Cities Less than 1,000 people Surplus /(Deficit) in S's Total Revenues 486,647 423,680 Total Expenditures 478,678 418,202 Total Surplus/(Deficit) 7,969 5,477 Greater Minnesota Cities Greater than 2,500 people Surplus /(Deficit) in Total Revenues 11,962,618 12,902,758 Total Expenditures 11,865,787 11,915,562 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 96,831 987,196 Exurban Fringe Surplus /(Deficit) in S's Total Revenues 1,759,918 Total Expenditures 1,594,963 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 164,955 Metro Slow Growth Surplus /(Deficit) in $'s Total Revenues 21,979,742 Total Expenditures 17,972,510 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 4,007,232 Metro Fast Growth Surplus /(Deficit) in $'s Total Revenues 25,891,001 Total Expenditures 24,404,452 Total Surplus /(Deficit) 1,486,549 1,889,682 1,783,802 105,880 23,452,399 25,413,887 (1,961,487) are the aging of the population, energy costs, and falling property values. Assumptions Used in Projections The analysis was performed in January and February of 2010. The analysis is static, mean- ing that the starting point for the projection is a snapshot in time in terms of input data avail- able. In order to project out into the future, several assumptions were used. The key as- sumptions were as follows: Property tax rates remain flat, meaning any growth in property tax revenues comes from tax base increases. This assumption removes policy decisions that cannot be predicted regarding the size of a city levy from the analysis. Inflation was set at 2 percent as suggested in the Minnesota BudgetTrends Study Commission final report. That commission examined state budget trends in order to project surpluses or deficits in the future. LGA was reduced by $50 million for 2010 from the $434 million remaining after the $102 million cut the Governor made in the now- ratified unallotments. LGA is then held flat through 2025. [Note: The $50 million reduction is slightly worse than what actually transpired in the 2010 legislative session (an additional cut of $7.8 million). There are seri- ous concerns, however, about the future avail- ability of LGA given the state's ongoing budget deficit problems.] MVHC reimbursements were reduced 11.5 percent in 2010.This reduction is in addition to the $26 million cut to the program made by the Governor in the now - ratified unallot- ments. MVHC is then held flat through 2025. 6,054,109; 6,120,786 5,792,211 5,974,612 261,897 146,174 28,025,214 29,153,107 (1,127,892) 428,381 436,421 (8,040) 12,938,025 13,009,920 12,449,301 12,910,728 488,724 99,193 1,918,779 1 ,857,523 61,256 20,287,852 20,146,489 20,805,475 18,844,717 1,443,134 19,6,10 ' - 20,499,383 452,382 ' 306,092 23,616,203 24,018,015 . (401,812) 421,029 452,504 (31,474) 1,918,186 1,923,490 (5,304) 2010 _... 2015 7,401,401 8,871,288 7,509,269 9,655,563 (107,868) (784,275) • 805,963,653 : 806,655,535 965,673,616 :' 1,152,822,869 1,397,057,453 777,566,709 - 817,552,784 1,093,404,406 1,494,453,286 2,056,802,151 28,396,943 ! (10,897,249) , (127,730,790) (341,630,417) 1'. (659,744,698) 27,894,954 30,282,672 (2,387,718) 24,559,953 24,921,095 (361,141) 33,885,355 39,206,578 (5,321,222) ,. 40,901,083 51,652,601 (10,751,518) 503,541 Y 601,405 578,248 753,254 (74,708) (151,849) 5,15,876,189 ? 19,297,776 16,606,221 21,728,376 (730,032) (2,430,600) 2,269,259 2,724,372 2,451,022 3,175,956 (181,763) i (451,584) 30,353,892 -- 36,643,352 32,057,793 41,899,270 (1,703,901) (5,255,918) [Note: The actual outcome of the 2010 session was a much larger cut to the reimbursement payments for 2010 of $45 million and then a return to the post- ratified unallorment level of roughly $56 million.] The projections assume that cities maintain sufficient reserves to comply with the State Auditor's position on fund balarices.Those reserves serve to meet cash flow needs be- tween cities'two main influxes of revenue each year and in case of unexpected expen- ditures such as dealing with natural disasters. The assumptions used in assembling the projections reflect information available at the time. For example, the final outcome for city LGA and MVHC payments was not yet known during the study period.Thus, the assumption that 2010 LGA would be reduced by $50 mil- lion following the Governor's unallotment reductions represents the best possible guess at the time. Since the analysis was performed, several key events have occurred that represent changes in cities'financial picture. An impor- tant one is that the large reduction ($50 mil- lion) to LGA that is assumed for 2010 did not occur. Instead of a $50 million decrease from the post- ratified unallotment level of $434 mil- lion, $7.8 million was cut. On the other hand, a much larger reduction from MVHC reimburse - ment than was included in the projections did occur.The 2010 legislature reduced the reim- bursement payments by almost $45 million. If those two changes were reflected in a revised projection, the 2010 deficit amount would grow for cities overall and for each of the dif- ferent city profiles developed in the analysis. The timing of when different kinds of cities would fall into deficit remains largely the same. 2020 2025 10,820,948 12,655,607 (1,834,659) 50,487,761 68,667,175 (18,179,413) 733,535 990,600 (257,065) 28,696,700 (4,776,763) 3,334,294 (817,172) LEAGUE OF IN4INNESOTA 25,702,162 30,390,176 J 36,319,204 CITIES 26,730,122 ' 35,769,335 ` 48,296,977 ! (5,379,159) (11,977,774) 44,824,243 -' 55,261,954 (10,437,711) 145 UNIV.'RSITYAVE. WEST ST. PAUL, MN 55103 -2044 N-(ONE: (651) 281 -1200 (800) 925-1122 W W W.I.M C.ORG LEAGUE of MINNESOTA CITIES CONNECTING & INNOVATING SINCE 1913 Cities, Services and Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions Application process to identify host cities for community conversations Background Through the "Cities, Services & Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions" project, the League of Minnesota Cities is seeking to engage people throughout Minnesota — the general public as well as key influencers of policy and public opinion. The goal is to have a serious, broad -based dialogue on the services Minnesotans expect to receive in their communities, how those services can best be delivered, and how those services should be paid for. To date, the League's implementation of Cities, Services and Funding has focused on research and awareness - building phases. The League is now moving into the "community conversations" phase. This phase of the project is being supported by a grant from the Bush Foundation and its InCommons initiative. Request for applications The League is seeking applications from cities and community groups (if supported by their cities) to host one of these community dialogues. Successful applicants will provide evidence of a network of community partners to engage the public in a variety of activities and conversations. In other words, cities that are chosen as host communities will be those where there are a variety of groups and organizations in which city or area residents regularly and actively participate. Criteria for selection will include a demonstrated ability to partner with other local leaders; enthusiasm for the project; commitment to continuing the conversation; and demographic representation. The League will select 6 -10 cities as host sites using an application process. The goal is to hold the community dialogues over the spring and summer of 2011. Cities that are selected will play a critical role in the Cities, Services and Funding initiative. These conversations will inform the next step in the project: policy development. In addition to the pride that a community can take in knowing it is part of this process, the League will publicly recognize through media relations efforts and at the League's Annual Conference in June 2011, and is offering one complimentary registration for the League's Annual Conference to host cities. (In addition, there will be four regional conversations where residents from several communities come together. Identifying the sites for those events will also be driven by an application process. More information will be shared once the format of these regional conversations has been finalized.) 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST PHONE: (651) 281 -1200 FAX: (651) 281 -1299 ST. PAUL, MN 55103 -2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925 -1122 WEB: WWW.LMC.oRG Cities, Services and Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions Application process to identify host cities for community conversations Page 2 The information provided in this packet is designed to help you complete an application on behalf of your city or community. Please keep in mind that these conversations are designed to be focused on cities overall — not on any one particular city. While some examples of a host city's services, service delivery approaches, and funding sources may be referenced, the conversation will NOT focus on addressing the host city's own service- or funding- related challenges. It will, however, provide participants with context that could prove helpful to localized conversations held by the city in the future. Key details about the application process • Applications to host community conversations are due by February 11, 2011. Applications should be submitted via e-mail to Rachel Walker, League of Minnesota Cities, at rwalker @lmc.org. Contact Rachel with questions at (651) 281 -1236 or (800) 925 -1122. • Applicants can be city staff or elected officials or leaders from community organization(s). o If an application is submitted by a community organization, it must demonstrate that members of that organization have the city's support for its application. • Applications will be reviewed by a panel comprised of League staff and selections will be made in consultation with a representative from University of Minnesota Extension Service (our facilitation partner) and the Bush Foundation (our financial partner). o Applicants that rise to the top may be asked to provide additional information to the review panel. • Host sites will be determined by March 1, 2011. Goals of the community conversations The primary goal of the community conversations phase is to engage the general public (city residents, businesses, non - profits, etc.) in conversation about city services, service delivery, and funding for the purpose of informing better, more sustainable policy solutions for Minnesota's communities. Additional goals are to educate and inform the general public about: • The city services Minnesotans rely on, including similarities and differences across the state. • The future cities face and what will shape that future. • Why it is important for the public to engage in dialogue around the future of city services and how they are paid for. • Gather the public's opinions, ideas, and insights related to what services cities should provide, how they should be delivered, and how they should be paid for. Cities, Services and Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions Application process to identify host cities for community conversations Page 3 Format of the community dialogues In each community, four conversations will be held over the course of a week (ideally, over two to three consecutive days). Three of these conversations will be designed to go to where the people are. They will be held in conjunction with work or events that currently draw people in — for example, a lunch -time gathering in the conference room or lunchroom of a local workplace, a dinner gathering at a school following parent - pickup time, and morning donuts in a church basement between services. The plan for these events is as follows: • The first conversation will focus on what services cities should provide, and at what service levels. • The second conversation will focus on how city services should be delivered. • The third conversation will focus on how city services should be paid for. • The fourth conversation will be a culminating event in a community venue where those who participated in one or more of the first three sessions and the broader community are invited to gather — a community center, library, or school, for example. This fourth conversation will focus on bringing together the perspectives gathered during the first three conversations and discussing trade -offs. Expectations of city elected officials and city staff in host cities The primary expectation of elected officials in host communities will be to reach out to community leaders and to actively and enthusiastically promote the events. City staff will be expected to: • Promote and market the events through a variety of vehicles, including the city website, the city newsletter, utility bill inserts, public notices and signage (draft text and materials provided by the League) • Work with local partners to promote the events and boost participation • Provide LMC staff with ideas and contacts for managing the logistical details (facilities, food, etc.) LMC role in the community conversations League staff will be responsible for the following activities: • Reviewing applications and selecting the host cities • Working with local partners to promote participation in the events • Designing and implementing the four conversation events • Booking facilities, hotel accommodations, food and other logistical support • Creating handouts and other communication pieces to promote the events Apply Now to Host Community Conversations Apply Now to Host Community Conversations LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Page 1 of 2 As part of our project "Cities, Services & Funding: Broader Thinking, Better Solutions," the League is now seeking cities to host community conversations with residents about the future of city services. The League's Cities, Services & Funding initiative aims to engage people throughout Minnesota in serious, broad -based dialogue on the services they expect to receive in their communities, how those services can best be delivered, and how those services should be paid for. The phases of this project are: 1. Research 2. Awareness- building 3. Community conversations 4. Policy development 5. Legislative action So far, the League has focused on the research and awareness - building phases (Link to: ht4)://www.lmc.org/page/l/cittes-services-fitndingjsp) . The project is now moving into the "community conversations" phase. Applications to host community conversation events are welcome from city staff and elected officials as well as from community groups that are active in and have the support of their city. Cities that are chosen as host communities will be able to demonstrate that they have an existing network of community "partners " —a variety of groups in which city or area residents regularly and actively participate. Criteria for selection will include: • A demonstrated ability to partner with other local leaders. • Enthusiasm for the project. • Commitment to continuing the conversation. • Demographic representation. The League will use the application process to select six to 10 cities as host sites. The goal is to hold the community dialogues over the spring and summer of 2011. Cities that are selected will play a critical role in the Cities, Services & Funding initiative. These conversations will inform the next step in the project: policy development. In addition to the pride that your community can take in knowing it is part of this process, the League will publicly recognize participating communities through media relations efforts and at its 2011 Annual Conference and Marketplace. Host cities will also receive one complimentary registration for the LMC 2011 Annual Conference and Marketplace, happening June 15 -17 in Rochester. The application process instructions contains more details on the dialogue phase to help you complete it on behalf of your city or community. The application deadline is Feb. 11. http: / /www.lmc.org /page /1 /csf- hostcitiesapply.jsp 1/25/2011 Apply Now to Host Community Conversations Page 2 of 2 • View the Cities, Services & Funding community conversations hosting application process instructions (pdf) (Link to: http: / /www.lmc.org /media/document/1 /csf applicationprocesspdj) • View the Cities, Services & Funding community conversations hosting application (doc) (Link to: http : / /www.lmc.org/media/document/1 /csf applicationform.doc) Read the current issue of the Cities Bulletin (Link to: http: //www.lmc.org/page/l /cities - bulletin- newsletter >sp) Your LMC Resource Contact Rachel Walker Manager, Policy Analysis (651) 281 -1236 or (800) 925 -1122 rwalker @lmc.org (Link to: mailto: rwalker @Imc.org) Copyright ©2011 League of Minnesota Cities, 145 University Ave. W, Saint Paul, MN 55103 -20441 Phone: (651) 281 -12001 Toll -Free: (800) 925 -1122 http: / /www.lmc.org /page /1 /csf- hostcitiesapply.jsp 1/25/2011