More Options for Public Safety Building Presented

CAPE MAY – Cape May City Council saw a 107-slide presentation (http://bit.ly/PSBPresentation) on the proposed public safety building (PSB).  
Although there appears to be a broad consensus that the current facilities that house the police and fire departments are unacceptable and impede operational effectiveness and efficiency, disagreements exist over the cost of replacing those facilities, the wisdom of combining the public safety functions into one complex, and the process used to arrive at the conceptual plans for the new building.
The four-hour council meeting, almost exclusively devoted to the PSB presentation, witnessed a push by the city’s public safety officials for urgent action on the current plans, along with a public comment period in which most of the speakers called for greater public involvement, while voicing concerns about the planned location for the complex.
The Committee
The advisory committee began its report to council with a retrospective of its two years of work since council appointed the group in August 2017. Over that period, almost all public comment at meetings praised the dedication and work ethic of the committee, even while some went on to criticize council for not taking a direct role in managing the process.
The council has been split along the same lines, with Council members Zack Mullock and Stacey Sheehan frequently arguing for a larger role for the governing body in the development of plans for the PSB.
Knowing that some members of the public continue to question a combined PSB on the recommended Franklin and Washington streets site, the committee report covered the consideration of alternative sites.
The two most often mentioned alternative locations are a 50,000 square foot set of lots on the southwestern corner of Cape May and Pittsburgh avenues, and a 1.2-acre parcel at Broad and Elmira streets. The report details pros and cons for the sites, but dismisses both as possible locations.
One clear objective of the first part of the committee’s report was the demonstration of the hard work and long hours put in by the volunteer group. The intention was to show that the report presented to council was the product of a comprehensive and diligent examination of the issue.
Current Facilities
Fire Chief Alex Coulter and Police Chief Anthony Marino detailed the many deficiencies of their respective facilities. The clear goal was not just to support the need for new quarters, but to demonstrate the urgency of addressing the issue now.
Coulter went into detail on the many ways in which the current facility hampers operational effectiveness and fails to meet professional standards.   
Using several photographs, Coulter showed the cramped space that does not facilitate efficient operation. He dwelt on the mold infestation that presents health risks for the firefighters exposed over 56-hour shifts.
Coulter also reminded the council of the changes that have occurred in firefighting since the existing firehouse was constructed, shifts that require larger vehicles and accommodation to growing regulatory requirements.
Marino followed with a collection of photos depicting running water on the inside of windows, water threats to records and radio equipment, questionable wiring and the lack of a fire escape.
The police department is located in the former high school built in 1917, with no considerations for the demands of a police facility. One set of pictures showed holding cells that do not meet state Department of Corrections requirements. The police department operates on short-term exemptions from state mandates.
Marino also spoke of inefficiencies created by the need to split the officers between the Cape May location and the substation in West Cape May.
USA Architects
USA Architects won the request for proposals (RFP) competition to design the PSB. After months of work, including numerous meetings with the advisory committee, the firm submitted three initial options ranging in size from 33,000 to 37,000 square feet. 
Cost estimates for those options were developed, which surprised city officials who then canceled a scheduled public presentation because the proposed options were outside the scope of what the city was prepared to spend.
By Sept. 10, the architects had come back with five options, which were presented at a public meeting of the advisory committee. The additional two options were scaled-down versions of the previous three, with both in the range of 27,000 to 28,000 square feet. 
The most significant difference in the new options was that the third floor of the proposed building, something present in each of the original three options, was no longer present.
The original three options had initially shocked city officials because they sported total construction estimates of $19 to $21 million. The new options four and five came in at $15.3 to $16.6 million.
Those figures for total construction costs contain two different components. One, the estimated construction detail cost is based on the known cost of materials and labor. The second component is less concrete, consisting of design and construction contingencies, along with expected overhead, contractor profit, and insurance costs.
At the presentation to the council Oct. 1, the architects had expanded the options from five to seven. These options include the five shown Sept. 10, plus a sixth option which was a variant on the two-story options four and five. 
The seventh option was the one the architects wanted to spend time on, calling it option 3-A, a variant on the three-story option three that had been seen as too expensive.
Option 3-A was added as a way to work back to consideration of a larger complex, which supports future growth in the public safety departments. No cost estimates were available for the latest option, so the difference between it and option three could not be ascertained.
Debt Service Analysis
The city’s long-time auditor, Leon Costello, was also part of the presentation. It was his task to show the impact on debt service in the city budget.
Costello’s basic message was that an $11 million investment was the breakeven point. Given the current set of city obligations with their pay-off dates, $11 million in added capital debt, which would not take effect in terms of debt service until 2021, would mean no increase in budgeted debt service. Each $1 million after that would mean an increase of approximately $67,000 a year.
Concerning the property tax rate, Costello estimated that at $11 million there would be no need for a tax increase, and by the time the city hit $15 million invested, there probably would have to be close to a one-cent increase per $100 of assessed value.
The analysis did not lay out all the potential capital expenditures the city may wish to undertake.
Recommendations
The advisory committee’s recommendations to council included building the combined public safety complex on the Franklin and Washington streets site, accomplishing that task within the next two years, and moving with an urgency that would not allow for further delay.
The committee urged that work begin in January 2020.
Public Comment
Public comment had speakers support the committee’s recommendation, and others continue to raise concerns. The concerns fell into four broad areas.
Warren Copeland and Jules Rauch raised misgivings about how the large structure in the heart of the historic district would fit with the city’s historic landmark status. 
Copeland, the chair of the city’s Historic Preservation Commission, argued that the building was too large for the site. Rauch continued to press council on what he termed the advisory committee’s lack of involvement with the Historic Preservation Commission.
Rauch said that the city has a faction that would like to see “Victoriana subside” in place of greater development. In so doing, Rauch raised a concern others have given voice to, which is how does the city pursue development in ways that accommodate its historic status?
The second area of concern focused on full public involvement in any decision on the PSB. There were the calls for a town hall meeting on the plans, allowing citizens to ask questions after digesting the material presented.
The third area of concern remains the combined facility itself, with a faction of the public unconvinced that one combined PSB is the correct solution to the problem. Both Wister Dougherty and Christine Miller raised the issue of possible separate locations for police and fire facilities.
Related to that is the continued concern of some who spoke that the location is the problem, not the combined nature of the facility. James Brady pushed for consideration of the site that houses the elementary school, a site he felt could be freed up by merging the Cape May and West Cape May school districts.
As the discussion progressed, at least one speaker expressed his frustrations with continuous evaluation and delay. “This has been kicked down the road for too long,” he said. “We need to address it now.”
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.