The agenda for the June 3, 2014, Coeur d’Alene City Council meeting notes the Council will be asked to approve “…the funding and authorization of staff to negotiate a lease agreement with Eastlake, LLC. and expenses for an East Sherman Police Sub-station.”  The staff report (at online Council packet pages 40/61-42/61) presented to the City’s General Services Committee lists the address as 1424 E. Sherman Avenue in the body of the report.

According to the Secretary of State’s website, there is no “Eastlake, LLC.”  However, the website does list “East Lake, L.L.C.” with a business address of 1424 Sherman Avenue, Ste. 300, Coeur d’Alene, ID 83814.  Here is more information about East Lake, L.L.C. from the Secretary of State’s website.

Long-time readers may recall that in April 2008 OpenCdA raised strong objections to the City’s ill-conceived and wasteful Public Safety Substation in the Park.  Some of those objections came from the unwillingness or inability of then-Chief Wayne Longo and Captain Steve Childers to provide satisfactory answers to some fairly basic questions we thought Council should ask so it could determine if the proposal could successfully achieve the Mayor and Council’s objectives for public safety.

We think those questions and others still need to be asked by Council and answered by the present project’s proponents.  As we noted in our five-part “Toilet Not Included” series in April 2008:

[We are] opposed to any City agency (including the Police Department and Fire Department) misusing urban renewal funds to cover for their inept public administrators who ignore responsible and timely planning intended to ensure tax dollars are prudently spent.  [We are] against public officials, both elected and appointed, who sign off on this or any other project without first establishing:

• There is a verified and justifiable need now or in the foreseeable future [and]

• It will achieve specific identified objectives efficiently and effectively [and]

• It benefits the greatest number of people.  Or stated negatively, it does not use public money to personally enrich a select group of people at the expense of others who can and will never benefit [and]

• The amount and method of financing is lawful and appropriate [and]

• It is not a political patronage payback.

We should have clarified then that we are adamantly opposed to unwisely spending any public money, not just urban renewal money.

Our conditions of approval from April 2008 are just as applicable now.  We would also add that the proponents should be able to demonstrate they have an acceptable process to verifiably measure the degree of success (or failure) of the proposed project.

In May 2014 in particular we also ask, “Why the rush to approve this on June 3, 2014?”  Remember this?

As far as we know, the new Coeur d’Alene Police Chief has not yet been chosen.  We think it is unwise but characteristically arrogant for Coeur d’Alene’s Mayor and City Council to commit the as yet unhired Chief to a five-year lease of a facility for which the new Chief will have provided no input.   What if the City deviates from its past practice and actually chooses a competent 21st century Chief?  And what if that new Chief determines that the East Sherman Police Substation would have been better sited somewhere else?  What if the new Chief has better ideas that would more effectively have accomplished the City’s law enforcement objectives without committing to the siting and cost of the substation being proposed?  Will the Mayor and Council be recklessly obligating the City to a five-year mistake, and if so, why?  Why the rush to set this in stone before the new Chief has been hired?

We found the acting Chief’s staff report to be thin bordering on anorexic in some significant details relating to the internal and external security of the proposed police substation.  The costs in page 42/61 of the staff report are lower than would be expected if all relevant security factors for this type of facility had been considered and addressed by professional security specialists.   Having a police substation located with commercial private office space in a single-story building presents a myriad of special security issues affecting the personal safety of not only City employees in the substation but also the private citizens working in adjacent and nearby offices.

We believe the Council and City Attorney should require the presenter at Council meeting to meet with the Council in executive session and provide detailed information about the facility’s safety and security.    Inadequate attention to these details can increase the City’s financial liability should someone be killed or injured.

We question the acting Chief’s representation that the total project cost will be $46,032.76.    By our calculations and using the dollar figures provided by the acting Chief on page 42/61 of the staff report, the costs to prepare the facility for operation on the first day will be approximately $44, 443.  But the lease will be for five years (60 months), and the staff report shows the monthly operating costs to be $1,590 per month.  So the actual project cost over five years (not including facility service, equipment maintenance, unexpected increases in costs, etc. ) would be $44,443 + (60 months x $1,590 per month) = $139,843.  We suspect it will be higher.

Since the motion before the Council at its June 3, 2014, meeting is only for “…the funding and authorization of staff to negotiate a lease agreement with Eastlake, LLC. and expenses for an East Sherman Police Sub-station,” we suggest that the matter be postponed until after the new Chief has been selected and has an opportunity to provide substantive input.  While the City might like to have the proposed police substation in place by July, we think that getting the new Chief’s input to a five-year obligation of about $140,000 outweighs the need for the hoped-for July move-in.