[Vision2020] City officials: Not enough room for a joint police headquarters

[Moscow Cares]

Courtesy of today’s (May 20, 2019) Moscow-Pullman Daily News.

——————————————

City officials: Not enough room for a joint police headquarters
Lack of space within Moscow’s city limits cited as major reason

Some Moscow residents question why a new police facility is the centerpiece of Tuesday’s bond election instead of a space the Moscow Police Department and Latah County Sheriff’s Office can share.

County and city officials agree, the reason the joint venture is not feasible comes down to space. They say a joint facility would require 15 to 20 acres of land, which is not available within the Moscow city limits — the desired area for the structure.

“We had a difficult enough time trying to find a two to two-and-a-half-acre site within close proximity of the downtown for the police station,” said Moscow Community Development Director Bill Belknap.

The city and county researched the idea of a shared facility in 2007.

Former Moscow Mayor Nancy Chaney said the concept was a city council priority in 2006 and remained a priority as late as 2010.

Latah County Commissioner Tom Lamar, who said the idea was discussed in 2007 when he was on the Moscow City Council, and MPD Capt. Tyson Berrett said the county backed out of the discussions.

“We were scheduled to have a meeting and the Latah County Commissioners walked in to the room and said the conversation’s over. We’re not going to talk about it,” Lamar said.

While the two law enforcement entities might be able to share a training room and weight room, Berrett said all other operations are unique to each agency and would need to be used separately.

He said a joint facility would essentially comprise of two separate facilities on a common site.

“We work really well with Latah County,” Berrett said. “We have a very good working relationship. But at the end of the day we both need different facilities.”

Belknap said a joint facility would not provide significant cost savings other than the cost per square foot would potentially be slightly reduced.

He said a shared facility would create a funding challenge as well. The city and county would need to hold separate bond elections and the failure of one election would jeopardize the success of the other, Belknap said.

Latah County Sheriff Richie Skiles said he is willing to talk about a joint facility, but added the lack of space available in the city is a roadblock.

“I don’t know how to do it together,” he said. “I don’t think it’s possible.”

Although Skiles said a new jail and sheriff’s office will be needed in the next decade, a joint facility that included a county jail would make it inconvenient to transport inmates from the jail to the Latah County Courthouse. The courthouse and jail are currently under the same roof.

Chaney said she supports the concept of a joint facility but noted circumstances have likely changed since the idea was examined.

She said former Sheriff Wayne Rausch and former Moscow Police Chief Dan Weaver seemed to think a shared facility was possible when the idea was discussed more than a decade ago.

Chaney said a joint facility would reduce the duplication of resources, such as construction costs for two buildings, utility expenses, janitorial staff and there would be one large parking lot instead of two.

“I think there could be cost savings by sharing that,” she said.

Chaney said the facility would also strengthen the relationship between the two agencies.

Lamar said there are pros and cons to separate facilities and a joint facility.

He said the shared facility discussion should have been revisited between 2007 and now. If the bond does not pass Tuesday , then the conversation should take place, Lamar said.

“I think it could definitely happen,” Lamar said of a joint facility. “But that’s not what’s currently being proposed.”

——————————————

Seeya 'round town, Moscow, because . . .

"Moscow Cares"
http://www.MoscowCares.com
  
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20190520/46045fe2/attachment.html>