Proponents of the over-priced bond measure on the November ballot for a new 148,000 square foot building to house the Salem Police Department like to say that critics of this poorly-planned proposal, such as me, are totally wrong that it would be feasible to build a perfectly adequate 75,000 square foot police facility -- AND make the Library and City Hall earthquake safe -- for much less money than the $82 million that the current supersized facility would cost all by itself.
Well, in this post I'm going to prove that it's the people who say I'm wrong who are wrong!
I've written a one page "How to reduce the cost of the $82 million police facility proposal" description of how this can be done. Here's the conclusion:
So about $60 million, or less, buys Salem a perfectly adequate police facility AND seismic upgrades to the Library and City Hall that will save lives when the Big One earthquake hits— rather than spending $82 million just for an over-priced and over-sized police facility.
I encourage you to read the entire paper via this PDF file: Download How to reduce the cost PDF
Here's an encapsulation of key points in those 573 words, along with some bonus screenshots.
What I tried to do is use the City of Salem's own facts and figures as much as possible to prove that Salem Can Do Better -- which is what the campaign for a wiser and less wastefully expensive police facility plan is called.
In April 2015, the Mayor's Blue Ribbon Task Force on the Police Facility produced its final report. After a bunch of meetings, which included getting expert advice from two consulting firms, the Task Force concluded (see above) that:
The 75 to 106 thousand square foot size range is a "best practices" estimate provided to the Task Force by design and operations experts. We generally agreed that this is the size of building that Salem should be considering given the scope of our operations, program needs, and size of staff.
Now, as I say in my paper, this 75,000 to 106,000 sq.ft. recommendation for the size of a new police facility included a new 911 Center (a.k.a. the Willamette Valley Communications Center), which now is in 10,000 feet of leased space.
So the task force's recommended square footage of the Police Department itself would be no more than 65,000 to 96,000 sq. ft., and possibly considerably less (the current plan is to include a new 25,000 sq. ft. 911 Center in the 148,000 sq. ft. proposed building).
Since the 911 Center is fine where it is for about another ten years, and a City of Salem financial analysis showed that it would take 30 years to break even on the $11 million cost of building a new 911 Center, compared with leasing at the current $144,000 a year, my paper says "Don't build a new 911 Center."
That would reduce the size of the proposed police facility to 123,000 sq. ft., but this is still way too large, since the Task Force recommended 75,000 to 106,000 sq. ft. -- which included a new 911 Center.
Plus, I show in the paper that assuming the past rate of growth of the Salem police force, 1.3 officers per year from 1977 to 2016, there only would be 20% more officers in 2045, while building a 75,000 square foot police facility would double the size of the current 38,000 sq. ft. Police Department, a 100% increase.
This shows that the Task Force and its consultants were correct to recommend a much smaller police facility than the obese 148,000 sq. ft. "full meal deal" (as city councilor Steve McCoid put it).
In fact, the same Chicago consulting firm that later worked with City officials behind closed doors to come up with the supersized 148,000 sq. ft. proposal that went against the recommendation of the Police Facility Task Force told the task force that a 70,000 to 100,000 sq. ft. police facility is what Salem needs.
In the December 2, 2014 minutes of a task force meeting, we learn that two consultants from the DLR Group were asked questions by task force members.
Here is the question where the DLR Group consultants said, "A 70-90,000 or 100,000 square foot facility would be in the range of what we'd expect to see for a [police] department of Salem's size with its complexity of offerings."
But after the DLR Group got a hefty several hundred thousand dollar contract to refine the task force's recommendations, that 70,000 to 100,000 sq. ft. police facility ballooned to 148,000 sq. ft.
(The reason isn't growth in the number of police officers over 30 years; the DLR Group said this only accounts for 8,000 sq. ft. of the 148,000 sq. ft., based on an outrageously large assumed growth of 2.4 officers per year -- about double the 1.3 officer per year historic rate of growth.)
Which is strange.
Another consulting firm, Mackenzie, also met with the task force. Mackenzie has designed 20 police facilities in the northwest, including four in Canby, Keizer, Beaverton, and Albany. The March 11, 2015 minutes of the task force report that the Mackenzie consultants said: "For the current need [in Salem], we would recommend a range of 73,000 - 106,000 square feet."
So I say in my paper that a 75,000 sq. ft. police facility which doesn't include 10,000 to 25,000 sq. ft. for a new 911 Center seems perfectly adequate for Salem. This was the size of the police facility that the Mayor and Police Chief were pushing for in 2014, when a City of Salem FAQ document said:
A right-sized and properly designed Public Safety facility for our community needs to be about 75,000 square feet in size spread over no more than three floors to function best in keeping Salem safe. At this size, the critical functions located in off-site leased spaces can return to a centralized facility with some room for growth over the next 30-40 years.
Thus City officials, and the City's own consultants, previously have agreed with me and other critics of the 148,000 sq. ft. proposal that 75,000 sq. ft. is a proper size for a new Salem police facility.
I now refer you to the paper I wrote to learn how it would be entirely possible to build a 75,000 square foot facility AND make the Library and City Hall earthquake-safe for $60 million -- saving both lives and about $20 million if voters reject the $82 million bond measure for a supersized police facility alone.
(In 2017, City officials and the Salem City Council, which will have three newly-elected councilors, can work with Salem's citizens to come up with a better police facility proposal that will be approved by voters.)
The construction cost numbers are sort of complex, so read my paper to find out how, to quote my final words, SALEM CAN DO BETTER.
Download How to reduce the cost PDF
The entire paper is in a continuation to this post if you don't want to download it.
------------------------------------------------
How to reduce the cost of the $82 million police facility proposal
The City of Salem’s current proposal is for a 148,000 sq. ft. facility, including a 25,000 sq. ft. 911 Center that can remain in current leased space for ten more years. Eliminating the 911 Center reduces the size to 123,000 sq. ft., which is still more than is needed.
Presently the Police Department occupies 38,000 sq. ft. (a frequently cited 48,000 sq. ft. total includes 10,000 sq. ft. for the off-site leased 911 Center space).
In 2015 the City’s Citizen Police Facility Task Force recommended building a police facility “in the range of 75,000 - 106,000 square feet to allow for expansion of operations and for a minimum 40 year life-of-building.” A new 911 Center of unknown size was to be included in this square footage.
Thus a 75,000 sq. ft. police facility without a new 911 Center doubles the size of the current 38,000 sq. ft. Police Department (28,000 sq. ft. at City Hall, 10,000 sq. ft. at other locations).
When the current Civic Center opened in 1972, the Police Department had 108 officers. In 1977, the Department had 139 officers. Now, in 2016, it has 189 officers. The average rate of growth during the past 39 years (1977-2016) has been 1.3 officers added per year. Projecting this rate of growth to 2045, the police facility planning horizon being used by the City, the Police Department then would have 227 officers — 38 more officers, a 20% increase, while the size of the Department doubles, a 100% increase, to 75,000 sq. ft.
This seems completely adequate for the Police Department alone. After all, the Police Facility Task Force recommended a building from 75,000 to 106,000 sq. ft. that included a 911 Center which likely would be between 10,000 and 25,000 sq. ft. in size.
The DLR Group has said that a 75,000 sq. ft. police facility would cost $45 million. However, this cost reflects the DLR Group’s excessively high $348 per sq. ft. construction cost estimate.
Construction of the actual police facility accounts for 63% of the current $82 million, 148,000 sq. ft. proposal. Applying this percentage to the $45 million, 75,000 sq. ft. proposal results in $28 million in construction costs, and $17 million in other costs such as design fees, furnishings, site acquisition, and allowance for contingencies.
If the construction cost is reduced to between $150 and $250 per sq. ft. (a State Police facility recently was constructed in Salem for $150 per sq.ft., and Task Force consultants cited $250 per sq. ft. as a reasonable cost), this lowers the cost to construct a 75,000 sq. ft. facility to between $11 and $19 million. Add in the $17 million in other costs. Total now is between $28 million and $36 million.
City staff have estimated that the cost of making seismic upgrades to the Library and City Hall is about $27 million in 2016 dollars. So the grand total for building a new 75,000 sq. ft. police facility without a 911 Center and making the Civic Center earthquake-safe is between $55 million and $63 million.
So about $60 million, or less, buys Salem a perfectly adequate police facility AND seismic upgrades to the Library and City Hall that will save lives when the Big One earthquake hits— rather than spending $82 million just for an over-priced and over-sized police facility.
Yes, SALEM CAN DO BETTER.
Prepared by Brian Hines
Revised September 5, 2016
Brian, about a year ago I took a poll of many of my most respected friends in regards to their plans and preparations for the impending Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake.
(I don't call it "The Big One" because I don't want to sound like an idiot)
The response was unbelievably irresponsible, right across the board.
Right out of the chute, about 75% did not believe there is any threat.
The rest gave me this mind numbing response, something like, "Oh, I just don't worry about things like that. When it it's my time to go, it's my time to go."
UNBELEAVABLE!!!
My guess is that you are talking to the wall.
Our generation is so spoiled that they may not even be able to conceive of hardship or calamity in their life until it happens and then they play the victim.
Realize that your awesome, conservative, anti tax and spend battle against the 3rd bridge has many layers.
Good luck on the earthquake argument. "We didn't have an earthquake yesterday; I'm sure we won't have one tomorrow."
Chicken today, feathers tomorrow, and the hell with the next day.
That is a summation of our sorry generation.
Posted by: Harry Vanderpool | August 24, 2016 at 10:25 PM